Development Builds/Alpha; Features or major core code work being carried out on the codebase. Bugs and features are worked on and improved, the team starts testing the code base for problems blocking normal use

Beta; We seek help from the beta testers, Charter Members and any brave community members to put SMF through it paces and look for specific issues relating to different parts of SMF, we start to bring down the number of bugs.

Release Candidate; We are confident the code is stable enough to be "final", but the fixes applied during the beta phase need to be tested, at this point it will be bug hunting and fixing time only, no major work shall be done.

Final; After some testing in the various stages before, we polish off the last of the release and bring SMF 2.1 out, by this time it will be stable and have had a long test process to hopefully iron out any show stopping bugs.

After this process we move into a maintenance cycle for the release, meaning that bug fixes and security patches will continue to be issued.

The most active part of SMF 2.1 development ended a few days ago, this means that after having added features and code improvements we are now facing a stabilization phase where we will not add any new features and will concentrate on fixing bugs.

With this post we would also like to start involve the community into the main development process in two ways: first officially presenting our public repository. As some of you may already have noticed, the main repository where SMF 2.1 is being developed is now publicly available at github: https://github.com/SimpleMachines/SMF2.1 That means anyone can see the code, fork it and send pull requests with new features or bug fixes.

Second giving you something to play with: attached is the first public "build" of SMF 2.1. We don't consider the code stable enough to be labelled as "beta", as such we are releasing "SMF 2.1 Alpha". It contains all the new features that will be present in the final version of SMF 2.1. Some may be clearly evident, some less so, and for that reason in the coming weeks we will post a series of blog posts to explain the main improvements from SMF 2.0 futher.

This version of SMF is not considered suitable for a public site yet, use it only for testing!

We all hope you will participate in SMF development with testing and/or patches!

Update: 15/01/2013The package has been removed since outdated.You can download the most recent version of the code from github, direct link.You can find the instruction on how to prepare an install package on the Online Manual, at the following page: How to create an install from repo

Very nice! Can't wait to play with it (that sounded much cleaner in my head)..Keep up the great work guys/gals! And love the new github!

**EDIT**The very first thing one should notice is the new theme lol, definitely going to take some getting use to.

For anyone interested you can see 2.1 Alpha on my test site here:UOFreeshards.net 2.1 Aplha Test SiteAll Core Features have been enabled on the site, if you want to register and test them out feel free.

**EDIT TWO**OMFreakingG! I have noticed a few things that I absolutely love! I would say them but no spoilers, unless you say it's ok lol..

For anyone interested you can see 2.1 Alpha on my test site here:UOFreeshards.net 2.1 Aplha Test SiteAll Core Features have been enabled on the site, if you want to register and test them out feel free.

That certainly looks quite a bit different from the current standard theme. I like the fact that it's still quite similar, but there are some aspects that will definitely take some getting used to from the look of it.

Thanks for posting this. I might register and have a play around with it later.

For anyone interested you can see 2.1 Alpha on my test site here:UOFreeshards.net 2.1 Aplha Test SiteAll Core Features have been enabled on the site, if you want to register and test them out feel free.

That certainly looks quite a bit different from the current standard theme. I like the fact that it's still quite similar, but there are some aspects that will definitely take some getting used to from the look of it.

Thanks for posting this. I might register and have a play around with it later.

Hehe yeah and my host is having some database issues at the moment lol so I just got it back online.. freaking host!But yes feel free to register, post, test stuff out, post things you like/hate.

**EDIT TWO**OMFreakingG! I have noticed a few things that I absolutely love! I would say them but no spoilers, unless you say it's ok lol..

* emanuele is curious!

Also some of the features I have found and love so far are,I am not sure but is it Ajax stuff added in, definitely the fact that Drafts support is being added and the fact that there's no more pop ups! Another is the way user info like ICQ ect is displayed by hovering over the Avatar! I am sure there is much more I have forgotten since last night lol..

Another is the way user info like ICQ ect is displayed by hovering over the Avatar!

I thought it was displayed hovering over the user name? At least it was for me. That's one of the new features I don't like myself, as I like post count, personal text, and contact icons to be easily visible without having to hover the mouse over anything.

Another is the way user info like ICQ ect is displayed by hovering over the Avatar!

I thought it was displayed hovering over the user name? At least it was for me. That's one of the new features I don't like myself, as I like post count, personal text, and contact icons to be easily visible without having to hover the mouse over anything.

Yeah I corrected it right before you quoted my post lol, I had put click the avatar

And I am sure it could be modded back the way it was but I kinda like it, it saves so much space and makes it look cleaner while still allowing you to hover and see everything you would want to know.

And I am sure it could be modded back the way it was but I kinda like it, it saves so much space and makes it look cleaner while still allowing you to hover and see everything you would want to know.

I want to see everything I want to know without having to hover though . I also would say that Kindred's point is very important on a number of levels, not least that people are lazy, and like to see information without having to do anything to obtain it.

I would imagine that it's always a nightmare updating forum software as you're never going to be able to please everyone, which is probably why so many mods are created in the first place.

I'll continue to test, and see what other features I can find as a regular user.

Hovering isn't the only way, the same can be applied on click, that's how I got it on my site (with a lightbox) since I dislike hovering too.

I also dislike having to see the same data over and over again, like the info part on the left, if I post 10 messages, there will be ten times the same data, over and over again, if a person wants to know my data then this person will have to click on my avatar to see it.

Actually all the crap next (and below) the posts is something that I despise...

The theme is there to be changed. furthermore, the default theme (IMHO) should just be a (good) skeleton that people can easily customize to match their own needs, not something that tries to make everybody happy, because in the end it will be something that no one really likes.

I want to see everything I want to know without having to hover though . I also would say that Kindred's point is very important on a number of levels, not least that people are lazy, and like to see information without having to do anything to obtain it.

I would imagine that it's always a nightmare updating forum software as you're never going to be able to please everyone, which is probably why so many mods are created in the first place.

Actually all the crap next (and below) the posts is something that I despise...

The theme is there to be changed. furthermore, the default theme (IMHO) should just be a (good) skeleton that people can easily customize to match their own needs, not something that tries to make everybody happy, because in the end it will be something that no one really likes.

And yes I agree with you completely emanuele, although I will say I don't mind signatures at least the first time.. then seeing them 80 times more in a thread is annoying lol..

**EDIT**On a side note some things I would love to see would be some sort of attachment sorting built in as well as lightbox or similar, I have always hated how when you click on a large image in the attachments it just enlarges it then you not only have to scroll your page down to see it all you then have to scroll the attachment window to view it..

The theme is there to be changed. furthermore, the default theme (IMHO) should just be a (good) skeleton that people can easily customize to match their own needs, not something that tries to make everybody happy, because in the end it will be something that no one really likes.

True, but the basic skeleton that is currently here is hardly cluttered. I mean there's only post count, personal text, and a few icons. That's hardly a major inconvenience to my mind. I feel that it would be better to design a mod/theme which allows users who don't like them to hide them, rather than have them only visible through hovering/clicking as the default option.

Still, I'm not skilled with IT, so I can only comment as a user of SMF, rather than a computer expert, and you can't please everyone all of the time .

I strongly encourage anyone interested to go check it out on Github. Using Git is enabling us to make changes much, much faster than before by allowing everyone to develop on what is currently being worked on.

I strongly encourage anyone interested to go check it out on Github. Using Git is enabling us to make changes much, much faster than before by allowing everyone to develop on what is currently being worked on.

Thanks for the suggestion, but I suspect that's more suited to admins and programmers.

I only moderate using SMF, so I'll just report any testing errors I find to testers on the same test forum who know a lot more about coding than I do, and they can get involved on the Github. I hope that this is okay.

well, rather than reporting bugs here, you should either report them in the bug list or on one of the test sites that the devs are reviewing/reading (like mine...)(especially since the hooks problem was reported and fixed last week. )

Also... note: once something goes into Alpha, there are no new features...

well, rather than reporting bugs here, you should either report them in the bug list or on one of the test sites that the devs are reviewing/reading (like mine...)(especially since the hooks problem was reported and fixed last week. )

Also... note: once something goes into Alpha, there are no new features...

I moved my post into Bugs report Board, before i sow this post, but thanks Kindred

OUCH! I'm sorry to say that I'm totally NOT impressed one bit! The new look, is ugly, sorry to say! But I suppose that's why there are different themes.

I see you've added an integration hook for loading up a default action (actually a non-action) within index.php, however, you guys failed to include this integration hook at the bottom when it falls through to the board index...

Thus: action=blahblahblah will load up the Board Index, since the action doesn't exist. However, it would make more sense to load up the default action from the integration function.

No offense, but ouch!!

I do however, like the idea of Drafts being added to the Core Features, and being able to disable Integration hooks that are added in by mods, but honestly, the first impression I got after installing the SMF 2.1 Alpha Release was OUCH! And you've added in a slight animation for when expanding/collapsing certain sections, which I find a bit slow and annoying TBH.

Well, I know it's only in Alpha status, so good luck!

P.S. - Maybe if I find some time, I will fork it with a few changes and resubmit it on your GIT Repository, but honestly, IMO, it needs a lot of work still!

Thanks, I'll give it a shot... I think I can improve the animation of your expand/collapse with 1 function that works in all browsers. And not sure what the Class-BrowserDetect.php file does, as I haven't looked at it yet, just noticed it. But by the name of it, I would assume it's a way to detect browsers and code differently for each.

Oh, wait, I see you've adapted jQuery into SMF, smart move! Was thinking of doing the same in DP, but now I don't have to, since it's a part of SMF 2.1. Anyways, I think I feel the forum a bit more, now that I've browsed around it more. Like I said, first impression is UGGH, but it kinda grows on you as you tend to experience it a bit more in full depth. I'll just play and have some fun with it anyways.

I wonder how much time I have to play with it before it goes public?? Cause my time is very limited, these days, with work and Dream Portal... argg!

P.S. -> I really want to thank the person who added in the loadCSSFile function in Load.php! And you actually grab the basename of the $sheet, and we can now supply our own id. YOU ROCK!!!

P.P.S. -> I am struggling with understanding how the Core Features work now. The save button is gone, and I see that there is an AJAX call, and a $context['hooks_exist'] as well as $subActions['hooks'] in the ModifyModSettings function of the ManageSettings.php file. Trying to understand why my mods Core Features aren't working... arggg!!! Looking into the Integration Hooks section reveals the hooks in the mod, yet states that the hooks aren't found??? Weird...

P.P.S. -> I am struggling with understanding how the Core Features work now. The save button is gone, and I see that there is an AJAX call, and a $context['hooks_exist'] as well as $subActions['hooks'] in the ModifyModSettings function of the ManageSettings.php file. Trying to understand why my mods Core Features aren't saving... arggg!!!

Well, only 2 hooks are installed upon installing the mod. And I'm using: integrate_admin_include, which points to dp_core.php file and integrate_core_features which points to the function within dp_core.php file. Am I supposed to populate an array inside of $context['hooks_exist'] with all of the hooks for the mod? Cause in dp_core.php, it handles the setting_callback which, I thought was enough... but apparently isn't. Was enough in SMF 2.0.2.

Than if the feature is enabled, integrate_pre_include gets used for the file that actually has the rest of the functions that the integration functions point to.

You are not supposed to do anything else than add the hooks where they should be. There is nothing else to mess with.

Well, in Core Features, don't you need to handle adding/removing of the hooks upon enabling and disabling of the feature?? SMF can't handle this, simply because there are hooks that still need to be installed, even when disabling of the Core Feature. Such as the hooks I've already mentioned: integrate_admin_include and integrate_core_features

Right now, I can see the Core Feature in there, but clicking on the icon on the right to enable it, pops up a Red box up top, stating, "Sorry, but the Feature doesn't exist". So, basically, it won't enable the feature at all.

ETA: Please feel free to split this topic where you see fit! And no problem, it's a pleasure finding bugs... And I don't mind squashing them either, some people get grossed out by it, not me!

SMF can't handle this, simply because there are hooks that still need to be installed, even when disabling of the Core Feature. Such as the hooks I've already mentioned: integrate_admin_include and integrate_core_features

The integrate_core_feature is already included (since you see the action, that means it is properly processed). The integrate_admin_include should be used since I explicitly copied the code in Xml.php (where though a couple of globals are missing).I'm not sure at the moment why it doesn't work for your since I used SimpleDesk (well, a modified version, but modified in other places) to test it in 2.1 and it enables/disabled without problems. So, as soon as I have my testing computer available, I'll check DP and see what is not working, but now...well, it's time to go buy some food if I want to eat this week!

Don't bother checking DP, there were edits that needed to be done to it, that might take a bit of time for you to get around to... Unless you want the package I have, let me know I can send it to you, but it's not on the DP.net site either, cause I just updated it, and only on my PC at the moment. The package on the DP.net site and on the SMF Site, only works for SMF 2.0.x, not SMF 2.1.

Sorry for going a bit off-topic here. But the more I look at the code of SMF 2.1, the more I start to like it!

I tried to install locally DP (1.1) without caring about the errors but the core feature works fine.The admin menu will not be displayed in alpha due to a bug (this one), integration hooks are reported as not-installed due to another bug (this commit gives you the proper code[/url]).

Ok, you are right, I downloaded the release from the actual GIT HUB instead of this topic, so that explains everything. Just now redownloaded and re-installed SMF 2.1 from this actual topic, and yes, this fixes everything, along with your recommended edits above.

- Solo

P.S. -> Do I have to purchase GitHub membership in order to Fork it and help with the bug fixes, etc. etc.? Cause I don't see any way to signup without paying for a membership.

First off - You don't need jQuery to make something collapse/expand that is animated and working in all browsers. Javascript and a bit of CSS will suffice for that just fine! But, to each their own. Like I said, I have a method of using JS that will work just perfect, hell, uses the same js from Dream Portal code that I wrote, if that's fine with you guys... but it's whatever...

I am actually quite annoyed at the display of the "MARK ALL MESSAGES AS READ" box (in the BoardIndex.template.php), looks ugly just thrown there, honestly, been working on all of these boxes that are just thrown at the end of sections that offer features for those sections, etc. etc. Cause this happens again, when you go to create a board: "ADD BOARD" box thrown at the bottom right-hand side, just dangling there... ughhh!

Yet when collapsing categories it just instantly collapse no animation what so ever. Why is this?

Categories collapsing/expansion has always been a bit particular and always used a page refresh because when a category is collapsed the entire data of the category are not loaded into the page (boards details, last posts, etc.). Of course all this could be converted to something AJAX. Personally I never cared about it because I don't use it (I'm quite selfish if nobody noticed before ), if there is anyone interested in add this cool feature feel free to fork SMF on github and send a pull request once the job is finished!

There is a lot to do and any help is appreciated!What to do depends on your interests: bug reports are all public, if you want to squish some serve yourself, if you want to add some new feature the codebase is there, code it and send a pull request (the Next SMF Discussion board holds some ideas for the future, as well as mantis, if you have some other idea maybe it's better to propose it in the Feature Requests board first to let everyone know).

Yet when collapsing categories it just instantly collapse no animation what so ever. Why is this?

Categories collapsing/expansion has always been a bit particular and always used a page refresh because when a category is collapsed the entire data of the category are not loaded into the page (boards details, last posts, etc.). Of course all this could be converted to something AJAX. Personally I never cared about it because I don't use it (I'm quite selfish if nobody noticed before ), if there is anyone interested in add this cool feature feel free to fork SMF on github and send a pull request once the job is finished!

Well that just makes me ask another question lol. Why does it need a full page reload when doing so. I have seen other software like MyBB have a collapse and it doesn't need a page reload. I believe this is the case with IPB aswell.

To save queries of course. When its collapsed the script doesn't need to fetch the data for it.

If you expand it, it must fetch it/have it already - hence it could be done through AJAX instead.

About animation through javascript: JQuery and Mootools(and others) offers optimised and smooth animation code that will work on all browsers due to heavy and focused development. Own cooked javascript or CSS3 might not. Its just convenient and saves development of these more trivial things. But, using those for animating categories requires that all boards are fetched in the first place, or at least right away through AJAX.

Ah, the joys of building a default theme.. Its never going to be nice for everyone, and its always one or two staff members that want their view in on it as well. So you change..and change..until your original idea is watered out and all your excitement over it are gone(..).

I'd say, ship SMF with the blandest theme ever, and let the users hunt for better third-party themes, where the constraints of making something unique isn't present. Its the logical solution.

For Me I've got to say this real good move forward for the SMF and I am happy with the Theme, because I could see from the the first glance it's something that will be fun to work with and even though it still has a taste of the SMF looks, this is an indication of the trade mark (kinda thing), and yet with all the added features , I find it very useful in fitting most any situation, if customized and or tweaked toward ones own in site on how their site should appeal to their own groups or community. I have days ago started working with this theme of the Version 2.1 Alpha and I'm liking it. And even tough I can see other ways that it could have been done, only leaves me the opportunity to try newer things with it LOL!

If I find and better way. I will implement this and document it on My site and or possibly site like Bloc's or Crip's site! I shall not complain on something done by others, but I may find another way, and this is really what it's all about in MHO! Everyone has their own preferences, and once they implement these, then should then be displayed, rather than expressed as dislikes and negativeness.

I find it better to start out with your likes and work from there on a more positive note!

With this said I should mention that I am very pleased, again with this great move forward>>!

Everyone has their own preferences, and once they implement these, then should then be displayed, rather than expressed as dislikes and negativeness.

I find it better to start out with your likes and work from there on a more positive note!

That's very very true!

I'd add that the default theme is exactly that: the default theme. Nobody force others to experiment and change things. I know that in the past (and probably still with 2.0) it was sometimes difficult to really make experiments because of the way mods are/were working (i.e. code edits and all the hassles of having to manually edit the themes), though with 2.1 and all the new hooks available, make mods that don't require any code edit will be much, much easier and that should allow themers to be more daring in exploring new ways of present the forum.Of course to make this scenario true the modders has to take up the challenge and begin to heavily use hooks in their mods. And that makes me wonder if I should suggest to change the customization guidelines to make mandatory the use of hooks when possible...

Everyone has their own preferences, and once they implement these, then should then be displayed, rather than expressed as dislikes and negativeness.

I find it better to start out with your likes and work from there on a more positive note!

That's very very true!

I'd add that the default theme is exactly that: the default theme. Nobody force others to experiment and change things. I know that in the past (and probably still with 2.0) it was sometimes difficult to really make experiments because of the way mods are/were working (i.e. code edits and all the hassles of having to manually edit the themes), though with 2.1 and all the new hooks available, make mods that don't require any code edit will be much, much easier and that should allow themers to be more daring in exploring new ways of present the forum.Of course to make this scenario true the modders has to take up the challenge and begin to heavily use hooks in their mods. And that makes me wonder if I should suggest to change the customization guidelines to make mandatory the use of hooks when possible...

Nice. (Almost) full implementation of css replacing most images. I have done that somewhere. The expand/shrink or up/down icon, need not be that big. It's ugly anyway. Try a smaller one. I would also sugest css icon based on html code (I can't remember where did I see one but you can search it of course).

A tooltip replacing poster's info is nice. I have put up this idea somewhere before (I think may not be here but in bloc's forum somewhere). But preferably, a simple avatar/picture is enough. Too much details shown are not necessary but may be left as an option whether to show or not to show.

The design of boardindex should be fully changed or at least an option whether to use that or a new homepage for SMF. I think bloc has some idea on that. It should, IMHO, show more details like topic, topic starter with smaller avatar/picture, in which board and few latest responses to it. A more like forum member's activity page to be precise. A member can choose whether to show all activity in the forum or just his buddy/friends plus recent or active (recently replied / commented) activity.

I haven't register yet, so I may not see other features. But do consider what people have long asked from SMF that is topic/post like system. Karma system on the other hand should be just a mod.

A mention/tag system and activity streaming center as opposed to information center? (monotiz has done these), a new and better profile page (like simplenetwork mod?), are all to be considered.

Lastly, javascript that expand/shrink the quick login form is a bit disturbing. If I choose to shrink it and go to another page, it will expand and shrink back. This is ugly. Do check that out too.

Overall, it looks just like SMF in SMF ways. I am not really sure whether I like or not but, it do has some improvements though may be not a major one and may be not to the satisfaction of all. Besides, who can satisfy everybody.

Ah, the joys of building a default theme.. Its never going to be nice for everyone, and its always one or two staff members that want their view in on it as well. So you change..and change..until your original idea is watered out and all your excitement over it are gone(..).

I'd say, ship SMF with the blandest theme ever, and let the users hunt for better third-party themes, where the constraints of making something unique isn't present. Its the logical solution.

Agreed .... there are many who love to make and or customize themes, so this should of less priority like Bloc says and possibly more time devoted on the main system and moving forward>>. I mentioned, I like theme and I do and I have already started working on and experimenting with it, if another is to come it should be something real skinny or clean! I feel there just to many things to get get lost in, like Bloc suggests.

I do not post much here but I'm at many sites, help and pushing to keep SMF alive and kicking and that's what I care most about.... 4 me doing themes is fun using SMF and I hope it stays that way LOL!

Everyone has very definite ideas on the layout and themes... I know what I like.., and I don't really like the new default. But, as I said, it doesn't matter... Because I can and will just add a custom theme to replace it. All of the bugs I have reported have to do with functionality, not aesthetics, or lack thereof.

I like the idea of software platforms providing a simple, straightforward, and consistent look and feel that is maintainable so that it is the same look and feel throughout versions. You're effectively building a brand with that theme.

I also appreciate products that take the time to highlight the best work of their community to demonstrate demonstrate the capability of the platform. Draw attention to those who are volunteering their time to build great themes and mods for the community. It builds good relationships and it lets consumers know that this developer did something right and should be emulated (license permitting ).Goose.

I don't really think anyone is thinking about a completely plain theme, at least I'm not. I mentioned a few times already, that I like this theme and find it nice and fun to work with.... I would only ask, that rather than changing it or adding more themes, that we the "user" as mentioned above, note any bugs found and post them or post the solutions if any and not add more paint to an already good painting, it will just ruin it, like also mentioned before>> it may cause for frustration and or lost of interest, with too many cooks, changing the taste of the soup.

You have a good theme >>!<< after the bugs and issues, if any, are ironed out... then the "Themer" can come up with what they think others will need or like!

There are other things, need be concentrated on! JMHO..

You can please some people sometimes, but never all people all the time!

Though I think that the idea of a "plain" theme is not that bad. In fact it's something I think it would be very interesting to explore.A "simple" (both in the appearance and in the customizability) default theme would encourage more people to find their way to new looks and not just install the software and that's all.Of course a "simple" default theme would probably be difficult to "sell" because many people want everything already set-up and working... especially nowadays: one-click install, one-click ordering, etc.

I'm still with Kindred on the lack of profile information displayed with the user name. Given that the layout of this was, in my opinion, very good in 2.0, I don't really understand why it had to be changed for 2.1. It's just a cosmetic change which takes away individuality from users, and introduces excessive homogeneity to the appearance of posts (i.e. you have to hover with the mouse to see most of the details).

I know that my view won't make any difference at all, and I'm also aware that someone is bound to make a theme which restores all of this information, but my reason for posting this is I would be interested to know why this change was made, because I just don't understand the reasoning.

Has SM implemented theme version check, so you can't install a SMF 1 theme in SMF 2.1?

Nope.

To be honest I have been toying with the 2.02 theme on the Alpha already and only find minor issue that could be worked out with out much Hazel I'd think, what I found is the following.

all main stuff works find so far, from the user member point of view, the only issues I find are on and with the Admin parts, of none SMF 2.1 Alpha default themes:

admin menu bread crumbs > the admen menu messy. the admin main window has trouble with the Iframe used for version history!unable to parse a complete Duplication of the default theme, and after edits in the current theme and or theme settings, you are unable to save your edits, in FF browser, but I do them off line and upload via FTP. Note the admin issue are present in the duped Default theme unless you transfer the admin.css to that duped theme, before working with it because it like I said is not parsed with the create new theme option in the admin section

Like I said so far minor stuff. also amt find some portals my need some tweaking! But as I learn more about these little things I shall post them and later will post some screens.

Other wise from your visitor or user's view, they work find so far, But I need to test more theme, I done only a few 2.02 themes so far! looking great >>!

But Kindred..your post is exactly what wrong with building a default theme, there are too many opinions. While you are not team member now, and your opinion isn't meant as a critique this time, its a sign of whats in store for anyone trying to create a default theme.

Which is why a bland, no-frills theme is a good solution.

But...then you loose all uniqueness with the software, as its not recognized anymore as "ah, THAT forum script" purely on the looks.

As for objections to changes..where do you draw the line? If a senior member for the team says he don't like the user posts, does that count as it having to be changed? What if Irisado here said it, should her opinion be taken into account? Should the designer have FULL freedom? or should it be done the google way, one tiny step at a time, with 5 variations of everything..

I think I know the answers to all of these already, but it always helpful to ask them again. Arriving at current default theme have not been a straight line, nor was it a true and unique idea put into form. Its a compromise, a good one..I like how it turned out, but nonetheless, its not something "new".

maybe its a question of whether forum software should really change or not, whether the way of showing posts as discussions, with lots of info and signatures repeated several times(like any good ad manager lol) is the ONLY way to show people discussing.

I think not. The discussion itself have taken a minor seat to all the extra info, to make people participate more. But do they participate more if they just fill out lots of info about themselves? Isn't the DISCUSS part the most important? Little thought have been given to that (AFAIK): how to make people engage more without building a "pseudo" home for them in offering all kinds of personal info areas.

The new default looks nothing like SMF. It's up to themers to make themes not looking like SMF, not the team itself.Removing all SMF icons and images, is IMO not the way to go. I also don't understand why this is done. You have the cus. team to make the original icons more modern, instead of just using standard web site icons.

The new default looks nothing like SMF. It's up to themers to make themes not looking like SMF, not the team itself.Removing all SMF icons and images, is IMO not the way to go. I also don't understand why this is done. You have the cus. team to make the original icons more modern, instead of just using standard web site icons.

The new default looks nothing like SMF. It's up to themers to make themes not looking like SMF, not the team itself.Removing all SMF icons and images, is IMO not the way to go. I also don't understand why this is done. You have the cus. team to make the original icons more modern, instead of just using standard web site icons.

Uhm, an inaccurate observation since NDT of 2.1 have plenty of nods to the previous NDT. But that isn't necessarily a bad thing, question is rather if a theme that really did look completely different, would be accepted or not.

As for icons..the web leans towards less of the small works-of-art glyphs and more into less detailed, but bigger symbols + more texts. Its a shift in perceived "coolness" lol and of course the big guys set the tone there. Where would we be without Apple to give us all that luscious design work?

As for objections to changes..where do you draw the line? If a senior member for the team says he don't like the user posts, does that count as it having to be changed? What if Irisado here said it, should her opinion be taken into account? Should the designer have FULL freedom? or should it be done the google way, one tiny step at a time, with 5 variations of everything..

From me: 80/85% complete freedom to the designer, 10/15% of space for other needs (translation, usability (even though Ant is much better than me on that one ) and some kind of standardization (i.e. if the designer creates a new template for a single page that can be created using another template...well... )), 5% for comments from others.But of course I know nothing about design and I'm rather adaptable, so I don't care too much about the interface.

Of course, in all that percentages there is a parallel value, but somehow more important: 100% of freedom to those who are willing to work on it.

I think not. The discussion itself have taken a minor seat to all the extra info, to make people participate more. But do they participate more if they just fill out lots of info about themselves? Isn't the DISCUSS part the most important? Little thought have been given to that (AFAIK): how to make people engage more without building a "pseudo" home for them in offering all kinds of personal info areas.

So true.Space for all the users' garbage, space for ugly signatures (and complex mechanisms to limit those ugly signatures), space for sidebars everywhere (left, right, top, bottom), and the message becomes just an annoying thing that can be ignored...

Uhm, an inaccurate observation since NDT of 2.1 have plenty of nods to the previous NDT. But that isn't necessarily a bad thing, question is rather if a theme that really did look completely different, would be accepted or not.

Of course it would not be accepted because it is "different" (and it doesn't come from Cupertino ).Well, I'm guilty here because I didn't like so much "Penguin" and that's one of the reasons I didn't work on it (apart from the fact I'm terribly dumb in theming lol).

I agree not just because it's Bloc and know him, he knows that If don't like something, I say so and disagree.... but as I surf the web, I'm finding more and more sites trimming down the graphics and using more HTML5 and CSS friendly stuff, and giving way for more and better content. as I have been mentioning on every site I visit. I have myself been replacing image with CSS ( experimenting for many years now) just because I like doing it. Take for example Utube and Y@hoo ...and for the News site, whos to say what is news now days? more content and less clutter, fast and smooth with attention to their subject matter or content!

Like I said many time it may look great. but can you find what you came here for + content ( information, answers ) not more confusion!

If your site is about SMF and Mod and Themes Then great, bloat sites may be your answer, but if you site if information that will hopefully be found by someone that needs or is interested in learn from it, then these gadgets and flash and jquery and image will not do the trick

Love the art work, but bottom line is 4 me, reliability and content and Pro like intro to you front door!

And these will also help your site to be found and passed on to others!

The SMF 2.1 theme doesn't work, cause there's nothing left of SMF. The previous themes, Yabb, Core, Babylon etc. all had something in common with each other. It was mainly the icons which told you, you were still in a SMF forum, and that's why it's a shame that they didn't at least keep some of those.Another view of mine is that if they really have to change that much from the past theme, then the past theme wasn't done properly enough.

I really don't mind the new theme. Most of it, is ok. But it's just not SMF. I just feel like I've gone somewhere else when I visit my newly installed SMF 2.1.

So now SMF it's all about its icons...heck I thought it was the code and the community...I was so wrong...well, it's not too late to revert everything (including features and theme, what matters are the icons) back to 1.0 default.[/sarcasm]

The theme is good!!!let's not go backward, I'm getting way too old for that! and the old cell phone was so heavy, but had nice features for it's day!

The SMF system is looking good and moving, let's be happy!!

I tested some older 2.02 SMF themes and they work with little to be done>> I have managed to take the theme apart and started customizing things, no real problems thus far, same with the 2,02 SMF default them, most issues are only looks ( cosmetic ) admin related stuff I mentioned before.

All the little stuff I do not like I can change!

With both the Version beta 2.02 and 2.1 Alpha can be changed to look like the older SMF in many ways and also changed to look more WP or Blog like, this is being worked on by a few already. I have also discovered some real basic changes that made a world of difference in the looks and feel, (still hard at this part)... Like I and many have said, lets leave that to the Theme designers to spend time on, and present this stuff later on.

What concerns me more is the when, and what it takes to get to the Beta.

Hate to see this get stuck on options of the theme (so far minor stuff)

Change can be difficult. And, if you have built your forum's identity around the CURVE theme, you are bound to be a little shocked by the change.I do not imagine that the developers here will get stuck on options of the theme.

The SMF team knows that it is only one small part of the SMF community. Though the team does its best to understand the needs of the entire community and deliver improvements and even excitement with each new major version of SMF, it cannot possibly satisfy every need of every community member. Just as the team members work on what we love, we encourage you all to work on what you love.

Do you love the CURVE theme? Read through the new Penguin templates to learn about differences from SMF 2.0.2. Create a new CURVE theme compatable with SMF 2.1. You may need to make a few tweaks as SMF 2.1 progresses out of alpha, through beta, through the RC stage, and into its final release. But you will be rewarded with an SMF 2.1 with all the promised features, while still retaining the CURVE look you love.

Go ahead. Be the first to submit a 2.1-compatable CURVE theme to the theme site. It is free/libre software, after all. Just follow the rules of the BSD License and write good code. You'll have exactly what you want, and many fellow community members will thank you. What -- are you afraid you are not the only one with this brilliant idea? Just start a topic on the themes and graphics board to get together with several like-minded individuals. Many hands make light work.

It is nothing about that I don't like changes. I don't particular like Curve and I don't particular like any of the older SMF themes. Why do you think I make new themes that are not like the Default?To me, Curve was easy to make new themes from, I've never complained. That doesn't mean that I wanted to keep it. Releasing a new SMF version without creating a new and very different "state-of-the-art" theme, would to be be a step backwards.

But there needs to be some kind of recognition from one SMF standard theme to another and there isn't in the new theme. The older SMF themes had the icons in common. Icons were the oly thing telling you that you used SMF.A new theme could have been Curve with very different icons.I tried to talk for newer, enhanced icons before releasing SMF2. Just using the old ones as they were, was to me dull. I even made some suggestions to new icons when I was in the team.

Now the team finally made something new. But they changed to much in one step. There's no recognition anymore. That's what I'm "complaining" about!

Now the team finally made something new. But they changed to much in one step. There's no recognition anymore. That's what I'm "complaining" about!

TBH, I think that the new theme is much similar to Curve than Curve to Core, irrespective of the icons.And the new icons, of course, fit much better than the previous ones (even only because they are png with proper transparencies rather than gif with fake-like transparency).But as I said, I'm not going to waste more time arguing.

Yes, feel free to not make suggestions, nobody is forcing anyone to make any suggestion. But, please, feel free to stop complaining too, nobody needs only complains.

And on a general note: if previous developers were kind enough to listen to everybody and try to mediate, I'm not. Unless there is a good technical reason and someone willing to work on it.And of course "I don't like it" is not a technical reason. There are things I don't like me too in the new theme, but I keep them for myself and I'll hack it when the time to upgrade will come.

It is normal for people to like some changes and dislike others. These are opinions.

Because it is hard to write really well, and because many users are also writing in their second language, it is easy for misunderstandings to happen.

I hope you both can see that the statement

Quote

But there needs to be some kind of recognition from one SMF standard theme to another and there isn't in the new theme.

could be taken in more than one way.

To emanuele, it seemed like an order or requirement ("there needs to be"), whereas Akhyne says it is only his opinion, with no expectation that the SMF team really NEEDS to do it that way.

I hope you can agree this just is a little misunderstanding, and agree to amicably disagree about the new theme.

Of course, Akhyne is free to make a new theme which suits his own ideas of the perfect default theme for SMF 2.1. And we know that I bet other users will like it, also. We all know that Akhyne's themes (including ports of old SMF and YaBB default themes) are very popular. And the SMF developers team is free to continue with the new penguin theme.

That icons are the consistent thing is not accurate either, Akyhne. I made the Core design, and I made the Curve design, I know the icons changed cuz I changed some of them lol. I have always been keen to replace them, but it never got off to all of them..and my skills in icon area is very limited.

But I like NDT's are very different from major version to another - thats why I even tumbled with Curv(y)e drafts when Core was already established (which is a pretty "square" theme) - I wanted to it to be quite different, and the only question was if the team liked it enough. They did. The thing in common was rather the (approx.) blue hues, and of course not-so-different inner templates: the postbit, display area and board/messageindex. Those didn't change that much, although we did get in a few major changes there as well..not to mention the work Antech did on many details the last 2 years. I also continued the "3d" look, the Curve top bit is a bevel of sorts, while the menus in Core are bevellled as well.

Penguin is in a similar state. I wish it could be more different..but alas, its a good compromise, and it can still be tweaked further.

This reminds me back to when I made Core theme, when Babylon theme was major stuff and both Unknown, Compuart and Grudge were around. They were very "there" in all things development, but I remember I talked with Compu in private about making a new NDT, which became Core later - I asked how i should do it, suggest some changes, perhaps get more people..or should I just post the design and let it be? He replied with a smilile "just post it and state its the new NDT". Lol, I did and the rest is history. Man, it was more trust then, because when Curve came around, I did same thing..but it took quite a few longer to go forward, and many had objections. But I think there's a point in trusting someone to give all their heart to something, trust it will be spectacular and not act like you could do it better anytime..(..)

Thats why i never(ad if I have , boy, I landed right back on my backside lol) suggested to know better than devs when it comes to the inner workings on SMF, even to mods although i painstakingly stumbled through the TinyPortal mod. But when it comes to design, to themeing..well, I had a lot more drive in the start, not because of being young in the game, but because of the trust and optimism that were there. Today I am not sure, but its unfair in any regard, since there are lot of new team members now, many of whom I don't know and don't know me.

Boy, this became a lot of "me"..it wasn't so of course, just wanted to get a point across(and do the memory lane thing )

But...then you loose all uniqueness with the software, as its not recognized anymore as "ah, THAT forum script" purely on the looks.

Well, you could argue not that displaying post count, member status, and personal text that the software is unique, because, as far as I know, such features haven't been removed from the default theme of other commonly used forum software . That said, this is not my reversing my position, because my view is that those things are default features of any forum software, and if people don't like them, then a mod can be made to remove them.

That's what really puzzles me about the change. If you (impersonal usage) want to make profile information only available via mods, that's okay by me, as then forum admins can add what they see fit regarding all the different personal profile options, but why remove those three default features from the actual post? I just don't understand how they can be considered as something which shouldn't be a default.

Quote

As for objections to changes..where do you draw the line? If a senior member for the team says he don't like the user posts, does that count as it having to be changed? What if Irisado here said it, should her opinion be taken into account? Should the designer have FULL freedom? or should it be done the google way, one tiny step at a time, with 5 variations of everything..

I empathise with this problem, and I also am under no illusions whatsoever regarding the points that I make here. I'm not an admin, I don't have to do all the hard work of upgrading forum software, and all this sort of thing, I just moderate, and before that I was, and still am, a regular user who just really likes SMF software. I don't expect my views to carry much weight, but I just like to make what I hope are constructive comments about the direction the software is taking, mainly to see if I'm in a complete minority, or whether anyone else shares my concerns.

Quote

I think not. The discussion itself have taken a minor seat to all the extra info, to make people participate more. But do they participate more if they just fill out lots of info about themselves? Isn't the DISCUSS part the most important? Little thought have been given to that (AFAIK): how to make people engage more without building a "pseudo" home for them in offering all kinds of personal info areas.

Personally, I've found through looking through user profiles on the forum where I moderate that it tends to be those who post most often, and who are most active, who fill out the most information on their profile. This is, however, purely anecdotal, so I would hesitate to even suggest that it's correlation, let alone causation, but I just thought that I'd mention it as food for thought.

As I said above though, I'd have no problem with the personal profile sections being minimised, and more sections available via mods.

The SMF team knows that it is only one small part of the SMF community. Though the team does its best to understand the needs of the entire community and deliver improvements and even excitement with each new major version of SMF, it cannot possibly satisfy every need of every community member. Just as the team members work on what we love, we encourage you all to work on what you love.

It's worth pointing out that I do fully agree with this, and I'm sure that those who are skilled at coding, creating mods et al will find ways to satisfy most people.

The only caveat that I want to add is that if, like me, you're just a user of SMF software, you are at the mercy of the default theme more than if you are in charge of a particular forum, and are skilled enough to install the mods that you want correctly (or make them yourself). I guess the solution is I'll just have to prod Kindred in the nicest possible way .

Finally, I think that the fact that it's little details that seem to have provoked the most discussion somewhat suggest that SMF, as a whole, is very solid, and moving in the right direction, so I see that as being positive .

As I said above though, I'd have no problem with the personal profile sections being minimised, and more sections available via mods.

As for Irisado, though I personally prefer it to be very minimized, I also believe that it is better to give user option whether personal profile information (including signature) is to be displayed in details in post page, or only partially (important information only), or very minimized. Mod shall only be required to improve this option if needed but this option should IMHO be shipped with SMF 2.1.

1 thing I'm noticing in SMF 2.1 Alpha, is the <!DOCTYPE html> still contains the DTD reference. I believe this should be changed, in index.template.php, to just <!DOCTYPE html>, so that it places the browser in Standards Mode and still supports HTML5 without any validation errors! HTML5 is not based on SGML, and therefore does not require a reference to a DTD. In any case, it would make the most sense to use the HTML 5 DOCTYPE declaration instead of HTML 4 DOCTYPE that is being used still in SMF 2.1. This helps prevent (X)HTML 5 Validation errors.

Just a thought... I, honestly, don't know if I will have time to contribute to 2.1 at all, but just wanted to get this bit out there...

1/ Recognizability of a product. I think it requires some thought. I for one did recognize SMF when I looked at Penguin. It had the same color scheme, and basically the entire layout is 95% the same. Now, when you look at Wedge, the layout is also similar, but it offers a homepage by default, so it's not exactly SMF either, but it shows signs of being a fork. The color scheme is different precisely because it's not SMF, and it needed to have a scheme of its own. Those who like SMF's better can stick to something closer in spirit, like the Wuthering skin. (You can see it in action by selecting it in the sidebar's drop down menu. It should work for guests, too.)All in all: SMF 2.1 should be a recognizable SMF iteration because it's SMF, and because people are going to update one day or the other. When someone goes from SMF 2.0 to 2.1, they want to benefit from the latest additions and tweaks and security fixes. When they go from SMF 2.0 (or whatever) to Wedge, that's because they want to try something entirely different. It's not the same state of mind.For that reason, I think it's best that SMF keeps in line with its earlier themes when it introduces a NDT, and waits until version 3.0 (with the smCore rewrite) if they want to attempt something different -- which I'm sure they'll do, somehow.

Good recognizability examples: phpBB 3 (default theme has the userbox on the right, which is something no other forum had tried before, and it's still usable, even though I prefer it on the left), BBPress, IPB.Bad recognizability: XenForo, Vanilla, myBB. For the first two, the default themes are just too unconventional and full of odd ideas. So, yes, finding a generic forum you'll immediately recognize XF or Vanilla, but your second reaction will be 'too bad it's that default theme...'For myBB, the problem is that it's not recognizable enough... When I see a myBB forum, I'll either think it's phpBB or some vBulletin theme.

2/ Content versus containers. Oh, that... It's only one of my many obsessions. When I'm on a forum, as a power user I want to have easy access to any possible actions or information. Especially when I'm administering that forum. When I'm just a regular user, it's not so important. But if you start thinking like a noob user, or just someone that gets to your forum through a google reference and only cares to read a post and then go on with their life (which is absolutely fine with me!), they don't want all the clutter.Think of the last time you followed a news link and found a news website that had tons of 'Follow us on twitter/facebook/iwetmypants/google+' buttons, multiple ads everywhere (header, sidebar, content side, footer, popups...), things like that. Websites so crowded that you have to search carefully for the comments area. They don't encourage discussions, they just treat you like you're stupid and all you want to do is share their URL to all your friends.So, that's one of the things that bothers me: there should be enough side information to allow for both noobs and power users to be happy, but still make the content king.

I fixed this in my own way, with several tweaks:- having a mandatory sidebar. It can actually be removed by a skin, but these skins should provide for a fallback or expect the sidebar content to be hidden entirely. Having a sidebar by default means that modders will have a place to target when they want to insert content, instead of having to add it where they know it can be pushed -- i.e. where the main content is. I know it can be disputed (emanuele doesn't share my views on this IIRC), but it's still a decision I made that I'm happy about, two years later. Most notably the fact that if your screen isn't wide enough, Wedge won't attempt to cram the sidebar into its usual place, and will instead move it to the bottom, where it's unlikely to hinder your reading habits.- user mini-menus. I like to think that my implementation is what inspired the same thing in Penguin After all, it's not a very original concept, what's original in mine is that the menus are generated by JavaScript so as not to take any space in the HTML, and thus make it faster to load. Anyway, user menus definitely help with the userbox clutter. I still haven't gotten to removing the visible icons, which kind of defeats the menu's original goal, but that's only because I want to be able to see if a user has a website icon or not. I'll probably move that one next to the username because it's important to me, more important than a user's PM or mail links. You may also notice that these icons, even if they're still there, are now dimmed (reduced opacity) so as not to take attention away from the content. It's a good compromise and I'd recommend that if icons are going to stay, they're dimmed the same way in SMF. It's only 3 lines of CSS, really... (including the hover code.)- more padding! It's not up to Bloc's tests in this area, but it's still nice to have some breathing space I think... If you have to take away padding from an element for it to it, it's time to start thinking about the reason why it needs to be so cranked.- obviously, no facebook/twitter/etc clutter in the default theme Weaving... Not only does it save space, it allows make pages more responsive.- and generally moving all JS to the bottom (at least when a user has no session opened yet, meaning they don't have any JS in their browser cache), things like that make the page more responsive and thus you can start reading the content earlier.

These are things that I'd encourage SMF to try out as well...

Good clutter-free forum: FluxBB (although it takes it a bit too far... Given that even avatars are a plugin, that's a bit far-fetched in my opinion...)Bad forum (i.e. not clutter-free): vBulletin. It's nice to offer plenty of features... But it's a very bad idea to enable them all by default. I know, what they're after is your money, but to me it's always been a no-no because the focus seems to be on forum features rather than the post content...

So, all in all, I'd take FluxBB as a good example of both recognizability and clutter-free content, with BBPress a close second (it does have interesting things going for it, but overall it's too WordPress-centric for my taste). Had FluxBB had a nicer codebase (i.e. clean and flexible code), I might have worked on it rather than on an SMF fork... I really did evaluate it. It just wasn't enough for me. But OTOH, SMF was so slow in comparison, which is why I focused so much of my work on making Wedge faster than anything... I'm not sure it'll be noticeable for most users, probably won't, but it's still going to be something I'm very happy with. Plus, the work I invested in Wess (the CSS preprocessor) is probably going to be distributed with an OS license in the future, so that it can be reused in other projects.

3/ Going for originality in the default theme. Ah, this one is tricky... One could argue that Weaving is 'original' in many aspects, but I really did my best to make it look 'dull' to the untrained eye. Not exactly dull, but at least 'normal'. The idea, which is valid for SMF and every other web software product really, is that recognizability should only be a plus, but it's more important that when someone installs a forum and starts using it without applying any tweaks, it shouldn't look like everyone else's forum. It's something I never really fixed in Wedge, so I'm definitely not going to boast about it... Half of the work should be done by admins, i.e. installing a logo/header is the first thing they should do. The other half should be made by developers, e.g. by ensuring that it's actually very easy to change the default look. I think that even just changing the background or windowbg colors would be enough to guarantee a 'unique' effect, as long as the default theme isn't too unique itself in its design. In Wedge, you can easily select one of the other available skins, which are quite different from the root one, but I'd like to make it easier to just change the color, so I'll probably also ship a 'test' skin that just does that -- changing some colors -- and will have the very bare minimum needed to do that task. If people look into that skin and see it only has a few lines, they'll probably want to play with it and change the colors, and then make it the default skin for their forum.I think that SMF's 'variants' aren't used much on SMF forums because (1) they aren't advertised properly, (2) SMF never really encouraged to use them (for instance by shipping a sample variant), (3) well, they're probably a bit complicated to grasp for the untrained eye... Even though it's not exactly true.

I think I'll stop here for now... I've given you enough food for thought

How does Wedge fare with mobiles..or simply smaller widths? Or more to the point, what do you have of plans for it?

Reason I ask is because I recently worked with trying to make a regular SMF theme more responsive, by altering only the CSS. The ideas of using separate templates for mobile users might not be the best after all, not when phones come out that have 1024px by default(..) It blurs the separation between touch=small widths and desktops which only get bigger and bigger(2100+ pixels). I think by working with the design's CSS is a better solution then, for now anyhow.

A few things I picked up from the net and use are: 1) use a selectbox for the menu, which hides on bigger widths than 480px 2) hiding whole columns in boardindex/messageindex on lower widths, only keeping the most relevant ones 3) using a sidebar to maximise the space on widths above 1200px, jumping beneath the main content on lower 4) stop relying on hovers on lower widths, to meet the typical touch-based devices, although as said, it might need to be re-visited5) using a css grid that can be put on 100% width on lower widths, and work as floats with percents on higher

In SMF 2.1 some measures have been taken to be more responsive too, Antechinus have written some about that. I think I will agreed with him now lmao.

I recollect some discussion about this in Wedge too..but its been a while since I followed that.

..but back to content versus clutter: its most times a question of what looks attractive first, then whats useful next. Somewhere inbetween those extremes is where the solution should be. If stark naked, the forum looks unfinished, if over-worked it looks bloated. But content, as in discussions foremost, though I have experimented with showing discussions as blogs/galleries etc - as have Wedge - is and should be the most important. FB is also about content to some degree..but it presents it in another way, it assumes a lot about you, presents things it reckon you will be interested in..and generally is not very fair to you in what you actually want to read. You select friends, but they are often suggested by..FB. And so on..

So the FB way isn't the answer IMO, discussions as up to now, in forums, have something great going for them, they follow a linear direction, and you only follow one at a time. Mechanisms for reading unread posts are there, but I think more could be done there, and perhaps more options to tag topics for example, so you can make a structure yourself on top of the unread/category/board structure. Or just make own preferred things like ignore boards..anything but more boxes about the sites you own, what social services you use, what color your cat has or where you lived 10 years ago..

A few things I picked up from the net and use are: 1) use a selectbox for the menu, which hides on bigger widths than 480px 2) hiding whole columns in boardindex/messageindex on lower widths, only keeping the most relevant ones 3) using a sidebar to maximise the space on widths above 1200px, jumping beneath the main content on lower 4) stop relying on hovers on lower widths, to meet the typical touch-based devices, although as said, it might need to be re-visited5) using a css grid that can be put on 100% width on lower widths, and work as floats with percents on higher

Touch and :hover are not friends. You can make optimizations for the desktop, but the designer would be assuming large screens are desktops but iPad 3's resolutions put that argument down. It's time to move one and leave :hover in the past. Navigating in SMF 2.0 on a phone is not fun. Try to send a PM. You click on "My Messages" and you see a drop down flash before you are taken to the PM page. There, if you want to send a message, you have to click on "Messages" (which is not a very discoverable location for "New Message" btw). If you happened to be zoomed in to click on "Messages", you are jerked up to the top of the page because the link uses a '#' anchor, and then you have to drag back down to see the popup under "Messages". It's just inconvenient for touch users. In 2.1, it's worse because once I get into "My Messages", I can click on any of the links in "Messages", "Actions", and "Preferences", but unlike 2.0, it takes me directly to the first item in the drop down, and I have no way to get to any of the sibling links. Hover doesn't work anymore if there is any consideration for touch friendly user interfaces, which includes desktops as touch-sensitive desktop screens are becoming more common.

Grid systems are helpful, but they really shine on content heavy websites like blogs. I'm working a project that is building a responsive template for SMF 2.0 to see how responsive design can be applied to forums. I've already posted about it and will keep the discussion in this post.

I also may decide to run this on my live forums, once an upgrade package is available. I highly suggest you know your beans before making a decision like that btw

Prevent this is the reason I didn't post the upgrade package!

Oh go on.. I have a carbon copy of my forum on my server that we use for testing themes, mods etc prior to implementing them on the main forum, so was hoping that there was an upgrade feature to try out on that..

but can understand for every 100 people that tried it there would be 1 muppet that tried it on a live forum

2/ Content versus containers. Oh, that... It's only one of my many obsessions. When I'm on a forum, as a power user I want to have easy access to any possible actions or information. Especially when I'm administering that forum. When I'm just a regular user, it's not so important. But if you start thinking like a noob user, or just someone that gets to your forum through a google reference and only cares to read a post and then go on with their life (which is absolutely fine with me!), they don't want all the clutter.

Think of the last time you followed a news link and found a news website that had tons of 'Follow us on twitter/facebook/iwetmypants/google+' buttons, multiple ads everywhere (header, sidebar, content side, footer, popups...), things like that. Websites so crowded that you have to search carefully for the comments area. They don't encourage discussions, they just treat you like you're stupid and all you want to do is share their URL to all your friends.

So, that's one of the things that bothers me: there should be enough side information to allow for both noobs and power users to be happy, but still make the content king.

Yup. One guy here is working on a Facebook-styled theme, partly because he's impressed with how much data FB outputs to each page. I've always thought that SMF outputs too much useless data to a lot of pages, and prefer to minimise it for less clutter. I think the best way to go is to first identify what is essential and put that on clear display. Then, decide what else would be useful and have that clearly linked, but concealed (droppys, etc). Otherwise, things are just too confusing for a lot of n00bs and casual users.

Quote

I fixed this in my own way, with several tweaks:- having a mandatory sidebar. It can actually be removed by a skin, but these skins should provide for a fallback or expect the sidebar content to be hidden entirely. Having a sidebar by default means that modders will have a place to target when they want to insert content, instead of having to add it where they know it can be pushed -- i.e. where the main content is. I know it can be disputed (emanuele doesn't share my views on this IIRC), but it's still a decision I made that I'm happy about, two years later. Most notably the fact that if your screen isn't wide enough, Wedge won't attempt to cram the sidebar into its usual place, and will instead move it to the bottom, where it's unlikely to hinder your reading habits.

Sidebars can be good (I use them myself via a portal) but I'm not sure they're necessary. If they are present, I prefer them to be collapsible without having to hunt for ridiculously tiny icons. A clickable full-height div down one side of the screen works well.

Quote

- user mini-menus. I like to think that my implementation is what inspired the same thing in Penguin After all, it's not a very original concept, what's original in mine is that the menus are generated by JavaScript so as not to take any space in the HTML, and thus make it faster to load. Anyway, user menus definitely help with the userbox clutter. I still haven't gotten to removing the visible icons, which kind of defeats the menu's original goal, but that's only because I want to be able to see if a user has a website icon or not. I'll probably move that one next to the username because it's important to me, more important than a user's PM or mail links. You may also notice that these icons, even if they're still there, are now dimmed (reduced opacity) so as not to take attention away from the content. It's a good compromise and I'd recommend that if icons are going to stay, they're dimmed the same way in SMF. It's only 3 lines of CSS, really... (including the hover code.)

Sorry, but I've never even looked at your coding for Wedge. The user mini-menu is an idea several people have come up with independently. Think of it as covergent evolution.

Quote

- more padding! It's not up to Bloc's tests in this area, but it's still nice to have some breathing space I think... If you have to take away padding from an element for it to it, it's time to start thinking about the reason why it needs to be so cranked.

Totally. To my mind, one of the things that has always been wrong with the SMF gui is that it insists on spewing so much garbage into such a tiny space. It's not necessary or desirable to do that, IMO. I've often thought that it's a relic from the early days, when everything on the web was ugly and the only way geeks could get their rocks off was by outputting bigger amounts of data than the other guys ( a sort of "mine is bigger than yours" situation).

Funny you should mention menus. I've just been tweaking them up over the last couple of days. We've decided to add flyouts to the old sidebar menus too, since some people still prefer the sidebar but could benefit from the extra access options provided by the flyouts. I had already coded them a while back, just out of curiosity, so it was easy to add them to 2.1. They use much of the same css that runs the other drop menus, so it's not that much more complex than not having them.

Screenshot attached. Second one is the same area focused in the flyout, but by keyboard access without javascript enabled. This should reassure people who are worried about us getting carried away with that new-fangled javascripty stuff. The accessibility of the entire 2.1 menu system, with or without javascript enabled, is a lot better than the 2.0.x system.

Tried several menu types in the "bwtheme" project I made a year back, where sidebar + flyout was one of them. I quite liked how they worked out, although i ended up changing how the sidebars looked, to better display the flyouts.

I think it's sensible to include them if we're going to have a sidebar option anyway. Styling can be done a million ways, but this suits the current theme IMO. Could change my mind on that though.

One thing I think I might try (custom, not default) is a fixed bottom bar for admin menus. CSS changes over the standard drop menu setup would be trivial, and I'm keen to try it for a while and see how well it works.

Personally, I've always used the sidebar in SMF. That is the VERY 1st thing I do when installing SMF. I change it from the Menu Drop Downs to the Sidebar on the left in the SMF Admin, which affects everything else fortunately! So, doing away with the SMF Sidebar in the SMF Admin within SMF 2.1 was upsetting to me as I don't like the idea of the Menu Buttons for this. Cause I got accustomed to the way the sidebar showed all of the sections and links, all at once, which is kinda the way I like to see it. Outputted on the page. Ofcourse, it could use improvements done to it, but I still like it outputted onto the actual page.

Yup, it's still there. We removed the little toggle thingy because it seemed pointless. 99% of people choose one or the other and leave it that way, so just having it as a profile option made the most sense. The only people who really use the toggle are the poor sods that have to keep testing everything.

The top bar is annoying and doesn't give any overview. It's like having a remote where you have to open a cover to see some hidden buttons.

But if it was controllable with key shortcuts like windows programs have, it would be something different. I hate using any kind of mouse.Some years ago, I worked a lot with a CAD program, called Eplan. It could be controlled 95% with key shortcuts or hotkeys only. I loved it!

Theres lot of "me like" and "annoying" in these latest posts... You can't really just wish it was so and so, and expect others to that DO make actual changes, to share the same vision.

I for one, has long gone stopped listening to individual's wishes and demands. You can get 20 different views on a single feature, and they still don't resonate with your own.

Wrong! What are forums for? To put people together in a... forum. In forums, views are given and discussed on different issues and matters.

And the team of Simple Machines should listen even more to people's needs. I don't tell what I like and what I don't like, because I want to decide what people should like. I do it to tell - in this case - that sidebar menus should stay in SMF. And I do it, because it was one of many things, team members talked about dropping in newer SMF versions.And if you don't want to listen to people, then why even run a forum?!

Unless my wife agrees with you, in which case, she (and you) are right.........

Smartest thing I've ever read. I have to remember to use that.

Akhyne, I know this should never be written down in a public place, but the customer doesn't know what they want. Ask Apple if the customer knows what they want. The saying "the customer is always right" means, placate them and make them think they are right, but make sure you still do what is right. Of course, that all implies that you are building an exceptional product and supply a great service. Otherwise, you're wrong.

I see it this way:I start using a forum software. I'm the admin. I'm in control. Using it for months, some tasks seems not to be easy. At this point, I've already gotten ideas on what I want. I seeks for it. Maybe I find it. If not, I make it or get someone to do it.

We are all forum admins in here, ain't we? We use, we think, we act. We're not the normal regular users.And the users in my forums are not stupid, although they knownothing about what SMF is. But they've seen a WYSIWYG in other software. So they ask me about it. I say "it's comming in the new SMF2" (and then 2 years of waiting lol).They ask for Youtube embedding, I find the mod for it.

If, by your logic Akyhne, a forum is a place where you are allowed to express an opinion - everyone's opinion will matter. If you discuss what brand of beer we should drink - sure. But not if you discuss what features should be in a mod, or in a theme..or in SMF 9.276.

Joshua, very true. But since we are not all Apple, then we have to at least assume we are still right. In the end, the success in any product is by how many actually wants and use it. Its not always a sign of quality though, which is the creators point of view(hopefully).

- development branch is where all the new features are added.- release2.1 is used for bug fixing- master for reference

Those branches aren't been used directly, all the people who want to work on 2.1 send pull request to one of those branches (either dev or release, never to the master branch), the PR gets reviewed and eventually gets merged to the pertinent branch.

You can fork the repo and create a new branch based on the release2.1 branch, if this branch haven't been updated in some time it doesn't matter, when you send the pull request the one in charge of merging your pull request will do the dirty work for you.

Development is made on each individual account, if you want the bleeding edge development then look at emas or Spuds forks.

The branch that (hopefully) is updated is release-2.1.Well, I have to admit that in theory we should only add bug fixes, but recently Spuds was a bit absent and so...well, some new feature went in there too... (and probably some more will go in the next "few" days...

About the names: as far as I know the same that has always been: in the credits page are listed the members that are on the team while the "current version" is developed (that's what I've been told was the "tradition", and looking at 1.0, 1.1 and 2.0 seems true).Though starting from 2.1 I feel (and I'm not the only one thinking that of course) we'd have to think about something different: the team is no more the "only" (and in certain contexts (theme for example) not even the main) source of contributions. We'll need to find a proper way to thanks all those involved.

Without getting into arguments about policy, personally I don't care about credit for the theme. Most people know where it came from anyway, those that don't probably wont read the credits, and everyone will be totally bored with it and wanting a new theme in a couple of years anyway.

yeh and that was a bad idea, this is not a stable release, this is not even stable enough for beta, putting this onto a live forum is opening yourself up to every bug and any security issues that 2.1 has. Also there have been numerous changes since the alpha that has been posted and what is now included.

Oh definitely on the upgrade stuff. I very much doubt that anyone will be prepared to provide any support whatsoever for upgrading an alpha site to beta. In fact, last I checked the upgrade script wouldn't even upgrade earlier alpha to current alpha. Alpha haz bugz. That's what alpha is for.

That said there are already at least two or three "live" sites with 2.1 installed for testing (see this topic), so as long as you know what you are doing it's fine.

Are you saying that we can view the live sites and they will have the latest fixes on them? Cause, honestly, I'm sure you guys have done some work to 2.1 since I last saw it... But contributing to an ever changing forum software could be tricky if that feature has been added, or something has been changed that I'm unaware of. Will these test sites be up-to-date with the latest features/changes to SMF 2.1 Alpha? If so, where are these test sites? Perhaps I've missed it somewhere??

I know SleePy set up a cronjob to synchronize his (live-but-not-public) test site.Kindred updated his last night (or the day before).I don't know all the others.

If you only tested the alpha you have missed many fixes for sure.If you downloaded the tarball of the release-2.1 branch in the last week then you have tested everything, but not a couple or two features that will (hopefully) go into 2.1 as soon as they are ready.

I know SleePy set up a cronjob to synchronize his (live-but-not-public) test site.Kindred updated his last night (or the day before).I don't know all the others.

If you only tested the alpha you have missed many fixes for sure.If you downloaded the tarball of the release-2.1 branch in the last week then you have tested everything, but not a couple or two features that will (hopefully) go into 2.1 as soon as they are ready.

Sorry if I missed out on the discussion, but is there a way to update the 2.1 with the latest fixes? I have the first 2.1 alpha release!

Don't know, have tried them all and SMF is the best for me. and the 2.1 looks like the right move so far as I can tell, allot of things are nice to have but not needed. If you have something good, it's best to just make it stable/secure and a little more flexible, if possible, and if something is not broken , don't fix it.

It's not a forum (only) ( it's Not a Blog only) but it is as I can see the most versatile community system out there, that portals and mods can be added on. I feel if you change things too much you may screw up and already good thing. ( i have seen this forum system used in so many ways already)!

I don't know how everyone feels, can not possibly know, but if I visit A vbull site I know as soon as the pages opens, if I visit a wp I can usually tell right off, and so on and same goes for most.

If The SMF team sticks to a solid base and makes some improvements on the way of looks and feel (or features) fine, but after you have a Kick butt system and great foundation to build on these are more important, to me anyway.

Some of the other systems out there are very hard for the topical user to navigate how to set up and use the system just to find it still does not do what SMF can do some you need a webmaster to set-up run and maintain!

Not to mention the fact that some themes are and look better on SMF that some have done, and are working on as we speak.

Again I like to say you are doing great, and please don't get distracted trying please everyone, cause it will never happen!

This is the same as messenger (MSN/YIM/AIM/ICQ) part, its also removed from core in SMF 2.2 (It transferred to custom profile). S in SMF means Simple remember (well i'm not a developer or never became one but one thing i learnt here, keep things simple). We are not in 1940 supply not creating its demand, demand changing supply.

This is the same as messenger (MSN/YIM/AIM/ICQ) part, its also removed from core in SMF 2.2 (It transferred to custom profile). S in SMF means Simple remember (well i'm not a developer or never became one but one thing i learnt here, keep things simple). We are not in 1940 supply not creating its demand, demand changing supply.

Yes. Keep it more clean and simple (until we do not have anything fun? Just kidding). Those who like it, may add it. That is simple too.

I give a critique:I really like the current "curve" theme, the new theme IMHO looks kind of bad compared to Curve.I think the theme has too much white and the blocks are kind of...floaty.colors and placement are a bit harsh and awkward,I think.the new theme doesn't really feel like the classic SMF style that is identifiable and easy to use.I'm kind of disappointed to be honest.

I don't want to sound rude, this is just my observation,please forgive how this post may come across as I have difficulty with expression of my thoughts;sometimes.

Bloc... is correct and as I suggested before, rather finding what we don't like about it, it would be best to think what can we do with it, an already great theme and frame work!

If some do not know how, there are many free and some paid, but allot of free help out here, once it goes to the test of the Beta stage, or future> If you do know how, then there should no issues fitting your needs!

My eyes are wide open on this one... I'm liking it and planing ahead with it in mind>> thumb up!

It's a toss up. You'd have to rebuild some of Curve anyway. It'd probably make sense to start with Curve's index.template.php but use default templates as a basis for the rest. Even then you'd have to restructure index.template.php a bit. I did do a basic 2.1 version of Curve to start with, but we ended up going with the other theme. If I still have the 2.1 Curve files somewhere I can give them to anyone who is interested (I'm not).

I'm not sure if this was answered already, though I thought I asked this. Is SMF 2.1 going to switch to the HTML 5 DOCTYPE? Or will it still be using HTML 4 (with dtds) as it does in SMF 2.0.2? I highly recommend that SMF uses the HTML 5 Doctype and that we do away with the dtd link, etc..

I'm not sure if this was answered already, though I thought I asked this. Is SMF 2.1 going to switch to the HTML 5 DOCTYPE? Or will it still be using HTML 4 (with dtds) as it does in SMF 2.0.2? I highly recommend that SMF uses the HTML 5 Doctype and that we do away with the dtd link, etc..

Several *should* work.I tried SimpleDesk for example and with few changes (the biggest is change all the icons from gif to png ) works rather well (it still needs some tweak especially to the editor).I think SimplePortal needs a couple of changes to the install script because of some code that has been moved.Some other mod I tested installs without issues (even with file edits). Some other will require more changes.

Of course mods with a lot of file edits (and in particular theme edits) are more likely not to work with 2.1.

Themes that use mainly default templates, and only have their own index.template.php, should be fairly easy to update. It will mean a lot of css changes, but most of them can be copy/pasted in blocks from default.

But I mean, this 2.1 isnt like the 2.0 to 2.0.2 upgrade ? no need to reinstall all again? or it's necessary to start from 0 and just exporting users and messages ? because IF i want to upgrade from my modded 2.0.2 to 2.1 and automatic upgrade isn't possible, can I do it manually?

To note, you can do a automatic upgrade at all times, but with major version changes it is highly unlikely any of your custom code will be left and the same goes for mods.So as far as the part for mods: No, not automatic. As for the normal upgrade itself: Always possible, just disregards anything you changed.

It's getting a bit out-of-hand to have to keep building mods and upgrading them for each new version of SMF. Is it possible that SMF 2.1 will have a better solution to mods, so that with each new version of SMF, mods won't have to be continually upgraded for it?? I mean, I like the idea of hooks, so this kind of really helps with mods not having to be upgraded for different versions of SMF, since that version of SMF will have those hooks still, so that is a huge PLUS in this department. But, as a mod author, it gets extremely frustrating to have to rewrite mods to support different versions of SMF, as each new version comes out, an upgrade for the Mod has to be made... I just wish there was a BULLET-PROOF process for creating a mod for SMF only 1 time and be done with it altogether, unless there are bugs within the mod itself. Having to account for each new version of SMF that comes out, and put together an upgrade within the package-info.xml file, is just getting out-of-hand, especially when you have upgrades for 5 different versions of SMF...

Anyways, I'm hoping that SMF, in the future will have better handling than just a version emulation for when packages are installed and hooks. Or perhaps, we could have a global hook system, with just 1 hook for everything and it will than have sub-hooks in it, which might work better!

Hooks is the bullet proof system you want, not only does it help with updating mods but for support too, if you use hooks you pretty much forget about the silly "how can I install this on my extremely customized theme?" questions.

You can also state a wider range on your package-info.xml, you can accept versions from 2.0.1 to 2.0.99 and if your mod uses hooks you can safely include 2.1.99 too.

Some people might say that hooks only covers a small fraction of the entire SMF codebase but, depending on your knowledge of hooks and the codebase itself, your can use hooks in several ways and not only the way they were designed for. Besides, there are literally hundreds of new hooks to play with.

Also, why would you want to offer support for old versions? stick to the current ones, this also help to encourage people to upgrade to a better version.

Yeah, I've been pretty amazed at the SMF Hook System that you all have been implementing over time, and it's a total relief! Definitely a step in the right direction!

Quote

Also, why would you want to offer support for old versions? stick to the current ones, this also help to encourage people to upgrade to a better version.

I don't wish to support older versions of the SMF software at all. The problem is, that SMF is always undergoing development to the point where a newer version keeps coming out. I build a mod for the current version, but than later, another SMF version creeps to the public with better features and different coding... this makes it difficult when this keeps happening over and over and over again. Cause now I have to update my old mods to support the newer version of SMF! With Hooks, this makes it much easier (as long as you don't remove hooks in the future of SMF, but who knows...?). So I can just use a hook and know that it will work on future versions of SMF, so there will be no need to have to keep upgrading every part of the mod to support newer versions of SMF when a newer version gets released! It's not about supporting older versions of SMF at all, it's about keeping my mods up-to-date with the new versions of SMF when they get released! This is a tedious task for mod developers, IMHO. Kinda discourages mod creation a bit also. But like I said, hooks have really helped in this department!

And on the flip-side of this, I understand that mods created for SMF do not influence the development of SMF itself, and probably should not! It's just a thought is all...

Actually not really... I understand that the internet is an ever-changing environment. But if you build something right the first time, why keep making changes to it? If so, than all that means is that you didn't build it right. Atleast now you are a step closer to building it right. SMCore should really help with building it right also!

Actually not really... I understand that the internet is an ever-changing environment.

SMF 1.0 is 8 years old (older than IE 7, as old as Firefox 1.0).SMF 1.1 is 6 years old (as old as IE 7 and FF 2.0).SMF 2.0 is 1.5 years old.It took 4.5 years to release a new version *almost* (because certain mods are still compatible) incompatible with the previous one. And the incompatibility is very well documented by the change in the major version number.That is not fast in any way. Think about what was the web 4.5 years ago and compare it to what is now.

Of course 2.1 aims to be as much as possible backward compatible since it's a minor release, but SMF is not exactly built with version-compatibility in mind. And the fact that mods want to change the theme is already a major issue in backward compatibility because (as we very well know since forever) is not even possible to be sure a mod would install cleanly on any other theme apart default.

But if you build something right the first time, why keep making changes to it? If so, than all that means is that you didn't build it right.

Not sure where you read SMF is built "right". Of course it depends what you mean with "right".SMF works perfectly for what it wants to do: a forum.SMF works less perfectly for what modders want to do: whatever they want.That's something known (at least I know it, learned by myself trying to fool the system to let it do what I wanted it to do). Though it's not something easy to change without a "revolution". Is it possible to do a revolution while keep backward compatibility? No unless you want to put a lot of bloat all around (and in certain cases it would be plain impossible anyway.

I notice on the Dev site you corrected some token issue with the themes, Just wanted to know where can I find this error, in order to correct it or is that possible without over writing everything. What I'm real after is could you point me in the right direction, I have installed a xampp server on my local machine and both 2.0.3 and the 2.1 Alpha installed to start learn some before I get way to old.

And BTW the more I use the Alpha the more I'm liking it, and working with customizing themes for it is some kind of Fun lol!

SMF works less perfectly for what modders want to do: whatever they want.That's something known (at least I know it, learned by myself trying to fool the system to let it do what I wanted it to do). Though it's not something easy to change without a "revolution".

The SMCore Project is going to be a "revolution" though and seems that you are going for SMF backwards compatible. And yes, I understand that SMCore is not SMF. But with the use of hooks, and SMCore together, you'll seem to achieve just this. Hopefully, once SMCore is finished, SMF can just relax and be done with it's development (once it is finalized), and perhaps the Developers could all take a break and/or even work on other extensions for SMCore. But that probably will never happen.

OK on this token issue of saving current themes edits seems to have been fix with the changes you made in the sources/Themes.php..the first save however gives an error ( sessions time out) but second save does the trick. could be a cookie issue or even browser? some minor thing!

I noticed and tried the other fixes you did in the template file for the default, had not effect on the issue at hand, but I placed them anyway!

Note that this is the latest 2.1 installer version I'm using , xampp 1.81 package localhost!

And yes, I understand that SMCore is not SMF. But with the use of hooks, and SMCore together, you'll seem to achieve just this. Hopefully, once SMCore is finished, SMF can just relax and be done with it's development (once it is finalized), and perhaps the Developers could all take a break and/or even work on other extensions for SMCore. But that probably will never happen.

Long story short, you can't. Then again you shouldn't be upgrading to 2.1 at this stage anyway unless you're a competent programmer or willing to understand that some things will likely be very very broken, because that's what *alpha* means.

Upgrading to 2.0 on the other hand (rather than 2.1) is easy, use the large upgrade pack. Note your themes and mods will need to be replaced or updated.

As far as the alpha 2.1 theme it is very nice to customize and I've done several already...But did some with the changes done offline then uploaded. If you make a copy of the default it will not render all the css files need so, you will need to create a copy then, just ad the admin.css to you CSS folder manually.

Note it also has a problem that emanuele is working out the minor token kinks in the Sources/Theme.php and template files ( you can scroll up this thread and find some discussions on this.http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=485590.msg3459025#msg3459025the problem is that the admin> current theme > edits would not save, but if you follow the links above you'll find the corrections to make this work!

I am running this alpha on my localhost (pc) and online test site and I'm have a ball working with it with very little problems, at least user related issue, But like mentioned it is alpha and should not be used on a live site, mainly for security reasons.

Simply Put I'm am very happy with the way it's going and thanks goes out to all involved!

Just and FYI here , but some web hosting companies Cpanel, script installers show the SMF 1.1.7 as the most stable or latest version, or possible even older versions, But if this what they may be referring to and the latest Version, if so then they will need to install, then update, or contact the Host! ( if they know what they doing they can upload and install the SMF 2.0.3 with the installer that come with the SMF ( fresh install ).

I'm not confused, I was more worried that everyone else would be confused. Yes, some installers state 1.1.17 as the latest, but that's because of themselves not being particularly up to date - but that's nothing to do with the issue being discussed that the update code in SMF admin panel that sometimes 2.0 series gets confused.

In fact, actually so does 2.1, both have been known to report 1.1.17 as being the latest when it shouldn't.

Quote

I'm sorry you get so confused, did someone ask you...

Nope. This is a public forum, everyone can voice their opinions.

Quote

I don't play your games, your way over everyone's head here or any place you go!

Wait, is that a compliment or a back-handed insult? I was voicing my opinion that we had one issue that was related, and then some other stuff came along that would have confused people more than might have been already, that was all. No games, no trickery, no snideness, just the observation that some people would be more confused reading this topic than they would have been before.

Quote

I don't what you do would not want be like you!

Most of the time being like me is actually quite miserable, because people like me spend hundreds of hours making things for other people and we never get much appreciation for the time we've spent in doing what we do. Being like me is not something people should try to emulate, because it's a rather lonely place. (I'm not complaining. I am where I am in my life due to my own choices for the most part. I do what I do so others don't have to. There is something quite acceptable about it all really.)

Most of the time being like me is actually quite miserable, because people like me spend hundreds of hours making things for other people and we never get much appreciation for the time we've spent in doing what we do. Being like me is not something people should try to emulate, because it's a rather lonely place. (I'm not complaining. I am where I am in my life due to my own choices for the most part. I do what I do so others don't have to. There is something quite acceptable about it all really.)

You are silently loved and appreciated by the masses. You are not in a lonely place but in a crowd of silent admirers. As off topic as that is, it had to be said.

Mstcool, have you checked your forum version? I mean using maintenance. I am surprised to hear that yours is showing update for version 1.1.x. I do not think that is even possible, or is it?

I made a test forum and thats the only file I uploaded. So yup its possible. :p

@Emanuele aha thx for making it clear.

@Road Rash Soo true!

EDIT: Also will we be able to install the current curve theme? I like the new one but I would like to have both. So time to time I could change it and stuff. Just Wondering. Yup its too early. But just wondering. :p Thanks!

I tried out SMF 2.1 today and I am impressed with all the new features and admin controls. I especially liked the addition of auto draft saving. However I could not be it to work either as the admin or a regular member. It was all turned on, permissions set to on and the default of minimum 30 (seconds I guess) was saved. But no matter how long I waited, the draft was not auto saved anywhere I could find it. Also the settings say that when in post you can select and insert a saved draft but there was no command to do so. Only if I was in profiles and I clicked on edit the manually saved draft, it toke me to the message board.

Played with installing various of the mods and themes for SMF 2.xx and the all seemed to install without errors and function as they should.

Yes agreed..I'm sure there is more than meets the eye, but testing Bloc's Coral theme and one of my custom themes , I'm finding the only real issue s are with the Admin section, the lay out is a bit messy, and the admin menu is bread crumbs, It looks like a matter of CSS on the 2.1, so I think I'll dig deeper and find out what a can on the differences

Other than the Admin stuff, The Coral theme seems to work well with the 2.1 alpha. I'm thinking that the 2.03 or earlier themes will need to call on the admin.css that comes with the alpha. because the same issues happens, if you load the 21.i theme with =out the admin.css or any copy you make of the 2.1 default, I think I've mentioned this to emanuele in another post!

so if there are not going to be any big changes in the default theme, the conversion may not be so bad ...hopefully

I especially liked the addition of auto draft saving. However I could not be it to work either as the admin or a regular member. It was all turned on, permissions set to on and the default of minimum 30 (seconds I guess) was saved. But no matter how long I waited, the draft was not auto saved anywhere I could find it.

Same issue here.

Under Members/Permissions/General Permissions I have "Save drafts of new posts" and "Automaticaly save drafts of new posts" (NOTE - "automaticaly" is misspelled, should be two L's) checked.Under Configuration/Core Features I have Drafts activated, "Enable automatic saving of drafts" is checked and a value of 30 is entered for "How often should drafts be autosaved?"

I've just installed 2.1 and have been playing with it this morning, so I thought I would share my initial thoughts.

I really like the floating sub-menus on the admin side bar. I was also impressed that when I installed a mod, the install option on the Browse Packages list said "Install emulating 2.0". Nice one

You've used the same "last post" icon from fugue that I independently chose for ChalkCat! Now I know I didn't copy my choice from 2.1 because I've only just seen it. I obviously tweaked the colour to match my theme but here's mine

I did miss the little toggle for the sidebar, but I suppose once the preference is set in look and layout, users are unlikely to need to keep toggling it, so perhaps it's no great loss... it didn't take up much room though.

As for the autosaving drafts, they're not working for me either, but I haven't checked over on the Github bug report area yet. I'm inclined to agree about the text shadows, but I guess that's something the themers can easily change. They're certainly not ugly, just subject to personal taste

I think it is a setting a lot of users have or will miss or be aware of its existence.It's a great function but perhaps should be a universal setting rather than a user profile setting. I don't know of many users of many forums who bother to check what settings they can change in their profile once they have registered.

I think the only change needed is that the setting should be enabled by default, with the setting in profiles giving users the option to disable it if they choose. Otherwise I can see it being one of the most asked support questions of 2.1.

Is there any reason why my new 2.1 install appears to run more slowly than my live 2.0.4 forum running on the same server? Or is it just the blue screen I get while I'm waiting that gives that impression?

Maybe it's better that we don't know. I jest to certain extent when I say that, but given the slightly controversial nature of some the changes (e.g. hover), perhaps it's better to be kept in the dark .

Thanks, but that wasn't quite what I asked. I know what the *current* differences are. I'd like to know what the intended full list of changes is supposed to be

Yep, that was (mostly) the intended, then the current list is a bit longer and lacks a couple of things that were planned (namely a mobile theme and better dealing with file permissions...oh and support for openID 2.0), plus the usual bug fixings.

To put it in context (i.e. those are just few things, are you sure it was just that for a release?) 2.1 was intended as a "quick release", to be ready (production wise, so including beta and RC stages) by the end of 2012, so 4/6 months development and 6/8 months of testing.

The only problem I see with that is that I'm not sure $_POST['reg_mode'] is still available at that precise moment in time; if it's set for ForumSettings() to read it, IIRC it won't be passed through for DatabasePopulation() to handle it.

The original code makes use of the value of $_POST['reg_mode'] during ForumSettings(), which means it's shown to the user at the previous stage. Only trouble is, ForumSettings() is only for populating Settings.php and the database doesn't yet contain the settings table, so putting in the insert at that point is guaranteed to fail.

The update moves the population step into DatabasePopulation() but still relies on $_POST['reg_mode']. Since that's requested from the user two steps back and originally applied in ForumSettings(), there is no reason for ForumSettings() to push it back to the form for submission through into DatabasePopulation().

Edit: I suppose one of these days I'll actually try to install SMF 2.1 again, haven't installed it in months (and didn't for this, after seeing two people report it failing, I just looked at it)

Please do note, there is no actual "support" for alpha versions.If there is a bug, we will attempt to fix it - but, at this point, the only folks who should really be running the software are folks who are knowledgeable about coding, etc and ones who can help track down the details behind reported issues. (which is not to say that you or anyone else is not such a person... but there are people who will install alphas and betas and expect full production level support)

Please do note, there is no actual "support" for alpha versions.If there is a bug, we will attempt to fix it - but, at this point, the only folks who should really be running the software are folks who are knowledgeable about coding, etc and ones who can help track down the details behind reported issues. (which is not to say that you or anyone else is not such a person... but there are people who will install alphas and betas and expect full production level support)

Ok so then the common user shouldn't have any say. Sorry I don't know much about mysql. Talking about turning away interested members.

You should definitely take a peak at it after that registration thing is fixed then.

I should definitely climb a mountain after that registration thing is fixed? Unless you mean 'peek' which is a different thing entirely.

I just find it all a bit sad that people would report it elsewhere in the hopes I'd be able to give them a better answer than they would if they had posted here.

@Allan: What Kindred is trying to say is that alpha grade software is still under active development and that things can and will change, to the point where only competent developers will be able to investigate.

Take this very bug. There are, what, half a dozen reports of it now? And yet there are only 3 people who might actually be able to fix it, at least that are actively involved in the discussion.

This is the thing I raised with my comment on the Wedge FB page and why I don't really want to give out alphas to people who don't understand what 'alpha' really means.

I am not turning away anyone...and, of curse, "common users" can have input.

However,Alpha and beta software is in a state of flux.As arantor said there is a certain level of debugging that s expected from people who are running test versions... And it would be useless to try and develop a theme for 2.1 yet, since, in alpha it is possible to completely drop or rewrite anything.

As much as I like the availability of the code on github, it does present a problem because general users will nstalled it and expect support. However, there is no support for alpha and only limited for beta software.

The only problem I see with that is that I'm not sure $_POST['reg_mode'] is still available at that precise moment in time; if it's set for ForumSettings() to read it, IIRC it won't be passed through for DatabasePopulation() to handle it.

Yep, it's still there (it's the same mechanism used for $enableCompressedOutput and $databaseSession_enable) because DatabasePopulation is run in the loop just after ForumSettings has returned true.

Take this very bug. There are, what, half a dozen reports of it now? And yet there are only 3 people who might actually be able to fix it, at least that are actively involved in the discussion.

I agree that's sad that people report issues on other forums. I don't know why they do, but for those involved here (or at least for me) becomes a bit more tricky to even know they have been reported (anyway yes, I was aware of the report at Wedge, and I didn't answer because I was doing other things...and also because I felt a bit uncomfortable doing debug on SMF on the board of another software, then when I "woke up" (yeah, difficult morning and early afternoon yesterday) there was the issue open, the time to have a look and test it and I sent the PR with the fix).

A topic in bug reports or a message in this same topic would have been quite nice to have...I usually don't kill people reporting bugs... usually. (maybe someone else does, in that case feel free to shoot him/her )

However,Alpha and beta software is in a state of flux.As arantor said there is a certain level of debugging that s expected from people who are running test versions... And it would be useless to try and develop a theme for 2.1 yet, since, in alpha it is possible to completely drop or rewrite anything.

Well, I always considered 2.1 quite "stable" theme-side because we really didn't change much of the background (of course in the early steps we changed few things, but nothing that would require a total rebuild of the theme, rewrite of certain things, but not completely. Of course it may become a bit tricky to keep track of changes if you are not using a local repo...that's true. And of course it all depends on what you want to obtain from your theme, if you just want to tweak the css it's one thing, if you want to redo it almost entirely it's another and the two options require different approaches).

As much as I like the availability of the code on github, it does present a problem because general users will nstalled it and expect support. However, there is no support for alpha and only limited for beta software.

What you are missing here is that we are supporting our product.We are not giving support to the users of our product.In that phase it's SMF that needs support and feedback from people installing it and using it, this is support that *we* need.

Building a new theme may let AllanD discover a bug somewhere, or may allow him to suggest some trick to the template that would improve the theming experience, or whatever.Have users that create mods for devel versions provides feedback to improve some aspect (we introduced tons of hooks, but do we really know if they are *really* useful? No.). Of course is a possible waste of time, but that's part of the game (all the time we "developers" are putting into our code is potentially a huge waste of time, but we nevertheless continue to do it).

We have warned people (at least I think), so as long as they are aware of that, play with a development version (and anyway the current 2.1 doesn't receive many commits) is fine. And if they don't know or don't understand that, they will learn at some point.

As much as I like the availability of the code on github, it does present a problem because general users will nstalled it and expect support. However, there is no support for alpha and only limited for beta software.

Make a point of saying that, update the git repos so that the installer has a very prominent message saying that it wont be supported as it's an alpha or put a banner at the top of the installer/installed forum to this regard for anything on git.

I don't like GitHub much either. Everyone keeps stating to download 2.1 file updates from GitHub but I find no specific single file download options. The only download I see is the full 2.1 zip. I have to copy/paste any file updates. Very time consuming.

I didn't really want to bother but I'll give that a try. However, I still think that a weekly updated zip would is a good idea and, since obtaining updated files would be easier it would probably get more members involved as well.

Is there any estimate on when the final version of SMF 2.1 will be released? I'm asking this because I would need the newsletter features that are in 2.1 for my forum, but if it is still going to take years until it is released, then I'll prefer to write a mod that just copy/pastes the current newsletter code from 2.1 GitHub.

No estimate will ever be given. We've been bitten in the past with giving deadlines and then failing to meet them.

Though if you notice what's going on Github (and looking at more recent topics than this one) you will probably get a fair idea of exactly how things are going and when things are likely to be done by.

Yes, I see in GitHub that every now and then someone changes something. Still I would like to know if it is going to take months or years until a release is made (I won't kill anyone if the answer is incorrect).

Every now and then? There were dozens of changes in the last 24 hours alone.

The problem is, if I give you ANY kind of indication, and that's wrong in any direction, I guarantee IT WILL be pulled up by the community as 'you promised it would be done by then' and then we get demonised. This has happened multiple times in the past.

I'm not recommending anything because I *know* there are people that will analyse my comments and read so much more into it than it is.

Read what's going on with the current blog updates, the activity on Github (in particular how many commits per day are going on that are bug fixes and stuff) and make your own mind up.

I'm not saying that you don't know something. I just wanted to ask an innocent question and I don't understand all that rudeness. You could always send me a private message if there is something you don't want to say publicly. I just wanted to know if the release is coming soon or not_soon, in order to know how I'm going to do with my own forum.

See, here's the thing, even if I commit to 'soon', people will complain if it takes longer than their idea of 'soon'. If I commit to 'not soon', people will complain it's taking too long. So the only thing I can do is to not give any deadlines. There's no rudeness, only defensiveness because we get enough people complaining about what we do without giving them ammunition to complain about us with.

Let me just clarify, the one time we ever did, it was merely the expression of 'I'd love to see it released in the summer'. Something *that* inocuous. And the amount of shouting come autumn time was incredible. And when it did come out - it was a beta release and it had a bunch of issues resulting from that, and people complained that it was late and buggy, of which the delays were the result of fixing some of the *other* bugs. (For those keeping score, this was 2.0 RC2)

It's not a bad thing. Just find it entertaining sometime and other times I find it helpful because I may not understand myself until you say it a second or third time. Most of the time I get it the first time around, but not always.

The problem, my cookie-eating friend, as often as not, is that you need a translator.You do your best to speak precisely, using the best words you can find for the job.Frequently though, your audience doesn't understand, because they are not familiar with how your words should be understood in the context you use them.

Often because they are not devs themselves. Sometimes because they are relatively new to everything "forum", or even everything to do with starting up a web site. Sometimes, because English is not their first language. It is almost impossible to guess, the first time you communicate with someone, what they know and don't know. So it is always difficult to make oneself understood the first time through. Frequently, coming at the same explanation from a slightly different angle will do the trick of supplying whatever context the reader didn't have the first time through. Or will get the reader's brain to make connections between things he or she already might have known but had not really understood. Or -- who knows?

Ah jeez. I have some reasons to update and not to update to SMF 2.1 when it releases.

Why I want to update are the major improvements. To the editor as well. But the reason, why not, is that without a doubt a TON of mods will break. And I might have to wait a long time before they get updated.

Ah jeez. I have some reasons to update and not to update to SMF 2.1 when it releases.

Why I want to update are the major improvements. To the editor as well. But the reason, why not, is that without a doubt a TON of mods will break. And I might have to wait a long time before they get updated.

Mods that uses hooks will still be largely supported, those who made source files edits only also would be largely supported.

This high compatibility actually turns out to be a burden, for us, not for you.

Ah jeez. I have some reasons to update and not to update to SMF 2.1 when it releases.

Why I want to update are the major improvements. To the editor as well. But the reason, why not, is that without a doubt a TON of mods will break. And I might have to wait a long time before they get updated.

Its not 1.1 > 2.0 thing, you'll be surprised I'm running live 2.1 site currently with some mods, i can't say they all working w/o touch but they are working (I had to made some changes on install files).

and avatars on board index so board index can look a less crap by default instead of requiring tons of modding to get smf looking less like it wasn't made for the last decade.. or is that still to many queries for 2014 forum software, what can't be done without options to enable/disable can't be done.

Given that hundreds of groups get used, the only way this could even possibly be a thing is if you had it as group_1, group_2 etc. or similar, and then you'd have to have a custom pipeline regenerating the stylesheet - or having the system manually attempt to modify stylesheets in themes, which is both a practical nightmare and a security risk.

Of course, if you don't like that SMF does it this way, alternative forum systems are available.

Quote

and avatars on board index so board index can look a less crap by default

I've never liked it, personally, but I believe 2.1 has an option for this.

Quote

or is that still to many queries for 2014 forum software

Given that this 2014 forum software has to work on the most stunted of forum hosts, serious considerations have to be given to performance. This is one of the things SMF has always taken very seriously and is how come we have communities with millions of posts running on a single server without too much difficulty.

Quote

what can't be done without options to enable/disable can't be done.

Every option that's added makes it slower, it also makes it harder to use, harder to develop, harder to test.

Given that hundreds of groups get used, the only way this could even possibly be a thing is if you had it as group_1, group_2 etc. or similar, and then you'd have to have a custom pipeline regenerating the stylesheet - or having the system manually attempt to modify stylesheets in themes, which is both a practical nightmare and a security risk.

ofc member groups can just have default css style for that group, or no plain css styling for membergroups as it is right now.

With an admin option to specify a membergroup css class per membergroup then tada..

none of this nonsense...

Quote

and then you'd have to have a custom pipeline regenerating the stylesheet - or having the system manually attempt to modify stylesheets in themes, which is both a practical nightmare and a security risk.

it will attach the specific class, while those with tons of membergroups can just use the defaults. Those who want slighty less naff looking forums can add some better style into it at least for certain membergroups where css class has been specified, or class is just the membergroup name.

i dunno any sites that use hundreds of membergoup .. but i'd bet vast majority of smf configurations barely use much more than the defaults.

Quote

Given that this 2014 forum software has to work on the most stunted of forum hosts, serious considerations have to be given to performance. This is one of the things SMF has always taken very seriously and is how come we have communities with millions of posts running on a single server without too much difficulty.

fork smf into a lite edition if its such a problem, seems more like an excuse

Quote

Of course, if you don't like that SMF does it this way, alternative forum systems are available.

yes xenforo seems like the next one to move to, my smf board is nothing but tons of mods attempting to get what is just another boards freaking defaults.

With an admin option to specify a membergroup css class per membergroup then tada..

You have clearly never actually IMPLEMENTED this. I have in the past and it isn't nearly the simplicity you make it out to be. (I am formerly of the SMF development team. I know the code base at least as well as anyone currently on the dev team. The facilities to provide this simply do not exist in 2.1 and are not going to.)

You see, the part you fail to grasp is the actuality of implementing this. You say it's nonsense - I happen to be a programmer who understands what's actually involved in making it happen.

So you set the colours in the admin panel. At some point they have to get from the admin panel to the style sheet in order to be used, meaning either 1) you don't have the colours configurable from the admin panel, period, or 2) you expect theme authors to define colours for the standard groups which most sites don't actually use.

Trust me, you do not speak for the majority of forums. Neither do I, technically, but I have worked with many hundreds of SMF installations over the years. I've seen so many crazy setups it's not even funny any more.

the default membergroups specified in the theme, just becomes common knowledge and easy to make forum admins aware of the changes

oh make a new membergroup, don't forgot to add this css into your theme style sheet, simple helper note in the relavent section if a new class is added or membergroup made etc.

such rocket science, though could be nice and have it automatically modify the theme css with the new class.

If you want it that bad, ask and/or pay someone to do it for you in a mod package. It won't make it to the 2.1 feature list (it's already feature-locked), and not to mention it's just too much work for such a minor change.

Except, actually, that's also several steps beyond the average technical competence of SMF's admin users. Editing CSS by hand only happens in most cases when people get given the exact CSS they need and told where and how to use it.

And it's simply a terrible use of dev time to build a massive piece of architecture for something that, as far as I remember, has been requested only a handful of times.

I have seen many, many themes, and none of them will suit, every Admin, Member or visitor, so what happens is that, either you take it upon yourself to learn a bit of the latest CSS stuff, make it appealing to you and you community, you pay someone to do it and or ask for some help, if you are no too fussy with them they may do it for you. Making a great software, secure software package is allot of work and Team work as well. The themes and mods can be done freely buy others and submitted to the SMT team, or on their own as also ways.

I have seem some/many CMS packages that allow limited colour schemes to be edited, via the admin control panel. but the systems are nothing like or close to the SMF work. They have, not much other to offer, than the front door looks and feel, with very like or way too complicated admin controls.

I say let's let the progress continue with out, minor requests of distraction.

I for one can not, but have wait for the next release Beta or what ever. and It not going to be the simplistic ways of the past versions, At least as I see and. I'm not afraid of the changes, but looking forwarded to working with it, as with the Alpha!

yes xenforo seems like the next one to move to, my smf board is nothing but tons of mods attempting to get what is just another boards freaking defaults.

This is often the very base of ones problems. I have been using SMF since it's birth and have been a theme designer for at least 10 tears. One thing that I have noticed is that a vast majority of forum owners spend a vast majority of their time working on cosmetics and installing unneeded mods and minimal time actually operating a successful forum.

Five Steps to a Successful SMF forum:

1. Install SMF2. Choose a theme. 3. Design a logo, change a few colors. 4. Stop trying to be the big shot with an over abundance of unnecessary mods. 5. Actually admin your forum.

At the beginning (first two years), I installed countless mods that did the most basic things, because I didn't know how to code, and I didn't know which files to edit. Now that I have this knowledge, I've come to realize that half, if not more, of the mods I installed in the past were useless, and I've been correcting ny mistakes ever since. 2.1 is a solid piece of software, and this comes after using it for a solid hour - great new features and great design. SMF, as the name implies, is a simple platform. If you want a bloated platform, then install all those mods or purchase a forum software that incorporates everything (I don't think they exist either, given that Xenforo also has plenty of mods that can be installed).

On github is information that SMF 2.1 is in BETA 1 stage, but I've question, why you don't released official information about that this version is available? Why you don't informing people of progress of works?

exactly --- it is being PREPPED for beta, which means we have changed the version strings... but it has not yet been officially released as Beta 1 because we are closing the last few issues we have targeted for the release and preparing the code for actual release.

Do you mean, will there be an upgrade.php which you run after you upload the 2.1 files, overwriting all 2.0.x files and requiring all new mods and themes?Then yes....

If you mean, will there be a package manage patch file...Then no...

This is version upgrade, not a patch release.

Thanks for the information Kindred. Sounds good, I'm running an upgrade now from 2.0 RC3 to 2.0.9, looking forward to seeing if there are performance enhancements between the two. Also very much looking forward to eventually going up to 2.1!

I'm sure the devs get tired of hearing this, but thanks for all the time and thought that goes into a fantastic product. I am new to SMF but we love 2.0.9 and are looking forward to what you have in store with 2.1.

I in testing the SMF 2.1 see many user friendly changes in the 2.1 B1 so far, Now keep in mind I'm looking from the outside and in the looks and feel of the SMF. I am very sure, there is much more to it, on the inside to be considered, that we all may not see.

I see many things that have been improved, in the looks and styling of the 2.1! Not only in the styling it's self, but the php files, seem to be more admin friendly to edit ( only if you know how to ) that is.

I could go on with this but, better you discover these things on you own. For me the next step the RC + steps, are depending on several important things, some are; security , bug awareness, tracking and fixing, stability and basically a solid release. I feel it's to far in the game, to be asking for any major changes in the product at this point.

Any or all major additions and or changes, should or possibly be considered in the future alpha planning.

Now one thing, I have learnt from this is, many like major changes and others hate major changes. But the major changes are most likely not to happen real soon. ( as I can see)_ Some of us, will need to get use to the Change already in the mix, and I am and so are some others I know.

For now we need to let it flow and continue to test and report what we find.. The changes that most are looking for will be done by the mods and themes, that are already be looked at and done as we speak.

I know at times I myself get impatient, I just want everyone to get together and let things flow, not point at anyone, But the complete community needs, not get in the way!

One thing that may help is a topic for a wishlist for the future , but not now!

I completely disabled Registration for almost an Entire Month now at the Dream Portal site, that runs SMF (And yes, still getting Spam, but I suppose from Bots that have joined over a month ago). Reasons, were I had over 100 spam bots posting all kinds of things. Having installed a mod, Stop Forum Spam, did help a lot, however, crazy as it is now almost at 1 Million Spam bots blocked, in approx. 6 months that I have had it installed. Also, there are still spam bots getting through, as I had to delete over 500 posts from Spam Bots. And please don't even mention this being a security issue with Dream Portal, as this is happening on all of my SMF Sites, without Dream Portal, everywhere. I just hope that SMF 2.1 has some kind of improvement over this. Doesn't start to happen, until I post a link to my site though, since I suppose, bots don't know it exists until than.

This is why we set up anti spam Q&A with good questions before we turn registration on...

You need to learn how to implement spam control properly if your plagued like so. Ive got multiple SMF installs and never have this kind of problem. Q&A has worked wonders and also no captcha turned on because its pointless.

I completely disabled Registration for almost an Entire Month now at the Dream Portal site, that runs SMF (And yes, still getting Spam, but I suppose from Bots that have joined over a month ago). Reasons, were I had over 100 spam bots posting all kinds of things. Having installed a mod, Stop Forum Spam, did help a lot, however, crazy as it is now almost at 1 Million Spam bots blocked, in approx. 6 months that I have had it installed. Also, there are still spam bots getting through, as I had to delete over 500 posts from Spam Bots. And please don't even mention this being a security issue with Dream Portal, as this is happening on all of my SMF Sites, without Dream Portal, everywhere. I just hope that SMF 2.1 has some kind of improvement over this. Doesn't start to happen, until I post a link to my site though, since I suppose, bots don't know it exists until than.

Just asking, but has anyone really been able to control over the Spam bots and still keep your site opened to world, to be viewed! and another issue is countless members that may get in and never post.

What is your reason for wanting to join our community?That's the question a contact form type thing or mod?

However the success of the spam database a little while ago indicates that the anti-spam mods that I have are actually doing only a little bit of the work whereas the questions are doing the majority of the heavy lifting... Which of course then leads to the statement that the enhanced question ability having multiple answers and or multiple languages is still the primary and best defense

What about Spam bots? Has this been worked on at all in SMF 2.1? Reason I ask, is I experience an enormous amount of Spam on any SMF Site that I put up. Shortly after posting a link anywhere on the web to the SMF Forum, it automatically gets bombarded with outrageous spam posts. Has this been given any thought in SMF 2.1? Yes, I realize there are Mods that can help reduce this spam, tho none are bullet proof. But I have noticed that the ReCaptcha that google offers is one of the best ways to protect a form from being filled out via Spam bots.

There are additional measures in 2.1 for anti spam purposes. reCAPTCHA will not be implemented in the core in line with general policy for third party services (and before anyone says the word PayPal, do not even go there, this is what is called an exception to core policy... and reaffirms every reason why third party services are not supported in core)

which is yet another reason that we have avoided many third party stuff.

The exception, in the case of 2.1 is the editor and the jquery...the first because -- our attempt to code a good wysiwyg editor internal to the code was problematic and the new one, even though it is third party, is well done the second because -- well, jquery.

One thing I'm strongly against yet I'm truly sorry to say but most of the people in SMF (includes some of current developers) don't want to understand, depending on 3rd party too much makes your line of work a lot harder. You start to wait fixes from other people, because you expand the things you are using, which trust me every single new component added to your software not just designed for one thing, increase the risk of getting exposed to different type of vulnerability. So instead taking whole bootstrap & bootstrap rtl, I think its better to sit down and write your own CSS.

One thing I'm strongly against yet I'm truly sorry to say but most of the people in SMF (includes some of current developers) don't want to understand, depending on 3rd party too much makes your line of work a lot harder. You start to wait fixes from other people, because you expand the things you are using, which trust me every single new component added to your software not just designed for one thing, increase the risk of getting exposed to different type of vulnerability. So instead taking whole bootstrap & bootstrap rtl, I think its better to sit down and write your own CSS.

Yes!

It's also best to try an fit the situation you are in, rather than change the situation..

I really think ideas a are great, but at this point big changes will only hold things back!The looks can still be changed by doing to own magic, but it's best we stick stably and security and a solid RC. IMHOand if is not broke, don't fix it!

Even if Bootstrap had no support for RTL, you can still implement the same css file that SMF is currently using for RTL (just change class names). Or use the following: https://github.com/morteza/bootstrap-rtl on top of the original bootstrap. In any case, not to drag a subject through the mud here, a theme could surely be created using Bootstrap rather easily, I'm sure. And since responsive design has been the main focus of bootstrap, this would've been ideal to base SMF's default theme on, IMHO.

I wonder how has the development of Mods changed from SMF 2.0.x to SMF 2.1? Have just installed SMF 2.1 and seeing that it wants to emulate SMF 2.0 on every mod I try to install, and doesn't let me attempt to install it with SMF 2.1 Beta 1. Strange thing is, I haven't seen 1 single Modification at the SMF Customization Site that even supports SMF 2.1 natively, without emulation. And very little, to no documentation whatsoever on SMF 2.1 in the Development section of this site. I wonder what is involved with upgrading a Mod for SMF 2.0.x to SMF 2.1 Beta 1.

Noticing $modSettings['integrate_default_action'] that is the fall through action (if defined), taking the first array index, in index.php, is this implemented in a hook of some sort? Or just through the settings db table? Or a new setting in SMF perhaps? Also, where is the place to discuss development in SMF 2.1 officially?

Because when 2.1 was started, responsive wasn't a consideration, and was supposed to be a quick release while 3.0 was worked on. Trying to add Bootstrap *now* would be a mammoth undertaking (coming from someone that actually tried it) as opposed to something in the meantime that doesn't require rebuilding vast amounts of templates or anything.

I am intrigued though, last time the word 'framework' was used around you, you went off into a tirade about how using frameworks promotes lazy developers.

You can always use Codding Discussion board as well, then ask to move your topic to Mod Dev. board once you have new pack. But I personally don't see any harm in opening topic there to discuss SMF 2.1 related mod/theme stuff.

There was a "2.1 Comments" board but its archived, I'm not aware of any plans from Development and/or Customization team want to put a new board to discuss upcoming version related modding/theme creating discussions. Please wait Lead Developer, Lead Customizer or Project Manager to reply that question officially

Can I also ask, why you don't just use Bootstrap for responsive design in SMF? Or are you guys already using it? Haven't noticed.

TBH, if I didn't bring or coded it there was no "mobile friendly" look planned for Curve2 (bit shameless promotion but that's truth). So no real need for bootstrap. Another part is boostrap (or similar frameworks) means rewrite to whole classes inside the theme. That's something totally unneeded for SMF 2.1, also I personally dislike those frameworks , I rather like to use things created for that software. I'm using Font-Awesome for Lunarfall just because I don't have skills to create icons for that theme etc... (+what Arantor said ).

I'm experimenting with systems built on Bootstrap and that's the thing, one, they built on it and the other is, they are basically light weight forums, very minimal functionality and templates.

I like it in that respect or use, but, it will be way more complicated to do on SMF unless a complete redo of the system, ( like mentioned above)! I also have another Video site that is built on Bootstrap.

I don't understand the complication of using Bootstrap? Hell, can basically do it in a theme for SMF, Since all SMF is templates pretty much. It basically would make a great Theme IMHO. Maybe a few minor changes in source code, removing floatleft and floatright, changing clear to clearfix instead.

Hell, all of my mods seem more complicated to me than creating a Bootstrap Theme for SMF.

Yes, I have never tried integrating SMF into Bootstrap. Thank you Mr. Obvious! Float Left = float: left, lefttext = text-align: left. Pretty sure the point is clear bro! Maybe you are missing a point here?

Clearly you never actually *tried* it. And missed the point of why floatleft and floatright are classes the way they are as well as lefttext and righttext (hint: not all languages have content starting on the LEFT)

I don't understand the complication of using Bootstrap? Hell, can basically do it in a theme for SMF, Since all SMF is templates pretty much. It basically would make a great Theme IMHO. Maybe a few minor changes in source code, removing floatleft and floatright, changing clear to clearfix instead.

Hell, all of my mods seem more complicated to me than creating a Bootstrap Theme for SMF.

Its very time consuming job, is it really hard? no... but moving SMF 2.1 to Bootstrap is major problem for everyone. I'm not saying SMF 2.1 is 90% compatible with SMF 2.0 but still some generic mods working well with SMF 2.1. Also I didn't find any support for RTL in Bootstrap which is very unacceptable thing from SMF.

floatleft/right clear_left/right left/righttext is very important parts to maintain RTL, they cannot be moved.

There is not a 'security team' per se, however there are people around in the ecosystem actively involved that are *very* familiar with security issues. Including people that hold Zend certification and over a decade of PHP experience.

If you feel there is a legitimate security concern, please send an email to security at simplemachines.org where it will be looked at and investigated.

Putting it in another perspective: there are no known security issues in SMF. Even the last ones that were patched all require a compromised admin account or a deliberately "dangerous" action by an admin (in which case all bets are off anyway). So there is nothing to "harden"

If you are interested in helping SMF's development, our github repo is the place to start

One thing I'm strongly against yet I'm truly sorry to say but most of the people in SMF (includes some of current developers) don't want to understand, depending on 3rd party too much makes your line of work a lot harder. You start to wait fixes from other people, because you expand the things you are using, which trust me every single new component added to your software not just designed for one thing, increase the risk of getting exposed to different type of vulnerability. So instead taking whole bootstrap & bootstrap rtl, I think its better to sit down and write your own CSS.

I used to agree but then I changed my ways. That is the antithesis of the idea of open source. You make it open source so anyone can find and fix issues and then release that change. Yeah, you might become complacent with checking your third party software but I'm willing to bet you wouldn't be checking that part of your own software anyway. At least someone out there is an expert in that area and you don't have to be. So, you can focus your time on being an expert of your area - thus potentially decreasing issues with it. If you want to fix an issue and the third party software is open source, you can contribute to it. If it follows good programming guidelines, you should be able to distribute your change in your software and not have to worry about forwards compatibility.

Actually if you outsource too much, in this case which is what you say is take everything from its expert, not only you wait fixes but also you load a lot more than you need.

I used to be overly concerned with that. My entire outlook on development has changed. I used to be the guy that wanted to get every drop of performance, but that comes at a huge cost for making good software. Watch for the 90% issues and grab the low-hanging fruit when you can but focus on writing good code and making software people want to use and develop. If performance is that big of a concern, there are plenty of things you can change to make an application like SMF way faster without writing code.

When I was searching a new news fader (slider), I see many projects left to dead. Its way too hard to find proper projects which gets some update - open license. Finding the balance is very important in my eyes. If you take a look at SMF 2.1, each outsourced material doing exactly what its asked for (excluding jQuery because its a main dependency for every component).

I'm confused about outsourcing? You mean with a CDN? Also, if you want bare minimum bootstrap, you can customize it and download it just like jQueryUI. Just download only what you need. Add to SMF install, no need to outsource, can be packaged with SMF. In any case, not my call. I just feel that maybe you are wasting valuable time on parts of a product (like Joshua already stated), for very little gain, when you could take advantage of open source code (Bootstrap modals, slideshows, tabs, etc.) that many have already discovered works flawlessly. This would allow your developers to focus on the very heart and soul of what SMF should be.

<div class="row"> <div class="col-xs-24 col-md-12">Hello, I'm on Left Side in Large devices, and my own row in small devices.</div> <div class="col-xs-24 col-md-12">Hello, I'm on Right Side in Large devices, and underneath previous div in small devices.</div></div>"row" class automatically clears element. Many great looking sites built using bootstrap ( http://discoverphl.com , http://libertydiscountfuel.com , http://www.thinkitfirst.com just to name a few that I'm familiar with ). Why rebuild something that has been built with a solid foundation already? Because you don't want to rely on other 3rd party software? This is something you are already doing in SMF anyways. I seriously doubt CSS can cause a huge security risk as much as jQuery does. Many people I work with surprised that Forum software is even still around. SMF has a good chance at maintaining it, but new cutting-edge technologies are making Forum software not so much appealing anymore. Why is HTML 5 not implemented? Especially since HTML 5 has a huge advantage over 4, and has been around for quite some time now. Why is SMF just now starting to use jQuery after all of this time? How did it survive without it? Even moreso, how did it survive without responsive design for all of this time?

The only answer I can think of is, Good People, Good Core, and Good Support!